Keep in mind he is literally a child of the unprivileged commoners, so poking at his origins or genetics is not “punching up”. His mom is from a lower class family with drug and alcohol abuse problems, and she had him before meeting the prince.
Just poke at his personality or actions. There’s plenty there.
Let me guess: There are ways for Google’s scraping, search engine, and AI model training to bypass this.
With that level of indirection gymnastics, you can accuse anyone of anything.
(This comment written in the language of a brutally colonizing and genocidal empire.)
Yeah but they don’t have to also inhale his farts.
It is a sentiment that separates politics from the people.
I believe/hope it is not a popular term because enough people believe it’s bad for democracy.
Depoliticaztion of the populace is what allows governments like Russia’s to happen.
Desktop computer: Installing a keylogger, for example, is cheap and require skills like “can purchase a cheap and simple technical part” and “can plug in a USB”, which are skills you can assume a CS student will possess.
Laptop: Same, but have to open the laptop and install a less standard straightforward loggrr on the internal cable. This require more effort and patience.
Phone: I have no idea, and I am a computer scientist who spends time thinking about this. I mean, all phones can be opened with corresponding equipment, and the touch screen is connected to the internal computer with a cable, but they differ in details per model and the space to work with is tiny. The research investment is significant and model dependent. Meaning, the effort cost is quite high and they’d need extremely strong motivation.
A family member with no inherent moral compass or empathy, whose eyes, ears, thoughts and agency belong to teams of trained profit-seekers in a different country.
I disapprove of this humanization of software.
It got more legal a few years ago, I think. Not explicitly “made legal”, but the legal foundations have been eroded. I.e. if you can expect to get away with something it is legal in a very real sense.
It’s always been practically legal for empires like the US, Russia, China to commit any atrocities in weak countries, More and more countries are seeing how much they can get away with.
Netanyahu tested the limits over and over and saw there were really quite few legal limits. With Gaza, he saw the limits didn’t actually exist at all.
During the invasion of Berlin in 1945, the overwhelmed German command trying to map out the Russian advance had to resort to just calling businesses or homes of people living in areas they were uncertain about.
If most people in a district did not pick up the phone, or someone did pick up and swore in Russian, they marked it on the map as invaded.
Different worlds of course, but the point is that civilian phones have intelligence value.
It could make sense as a super creepy tactical choice by Iran to deny intelligence gathering from abroad.
I feel that this article is based on beliefs that are optimism rather than empiricism or rational extrapolation, and trains of thought driven way into highly simplified territory.
Basically like the Lesswrong, self-proclaimed “longtermists” and Zizians crowds.
Illustrative example: Categorizing nannies under “human touch strongly preferred - perhaps as a luxury”. This assumes automation is not only possible to a degree way beyond what we see signs of, but that the service itself isn’t inherently human.
A bookie is needed. Betting requires odds and bookeeping, plus a prize pool guarantor.
The movies either leave the bookie out of shot for dramatic brevity, or, equally likely, have no idea how betting works but just copy other movies.
Their bullshit causes a risk that someone else hesitate or pass on vaccination. You did an attempt at convincing. The responsible alternative is to make them feel uncomfortable bringing up the subject.
A pregnancy is not a person to count. That’s anti-abortion rhetoric.
DEBA5E, DEADED, …BEEEE5 ?
That just sounds confusing. You’re putting me off murder now.
Ah, so the chance of rolling a 7 changes to 1/20?
Your question is already answered correctly, so I’m just chiming in with thoughts on a similar situation :)
If you weigh both dice, it gets interesting again.
The obvious is to make one die roll always 3 and the other always 4, and get 1/1 chance of 7 but that’s boring and you’ll only get a few throws in before you’re obviously cheating.
Dice are arranged so that opposite sides always add up to 7, meaning you can get 1,2,3 around one corner and 4,5,6 around the opposite corner. So if you weigh opposite corners on each die, you get a 1/3 chance of rolling a 7 by varying combinatons. You might get away with a few more rolls like that.
That is a strange way to say she’s 57…
But anyway! Range varies wildly with age. 6 years is something you at least ponder at age 25, but will feel like “same age” around 50.
My feeling based on what people seem to at least not care to even gossip lightly about: max 1 year at age 15. 5 years at 40. 10 years at age 60+.
Wider ranges are not problematic, but gets into at least “interesting to talk about”. E.g. “They are 33 and 40! Huh! Good for them.”
Guess the “Free Speech Absolutist” in charge of Twitter was too busy heiling hitler to step in huh.
Part of the answer is that the UI is “designed first” and coded to follow the design. If changes are seen as necessary when coding the UI, the design is updated first then the code made to follow.
So any UI behavior will already have a lot of accurate design and animation resources for them to work with.