freejazz

28 ms·

841.
by freejazz 1y ago
No. And?
842.
by freejazz 1y ago
Once again you are just talking about "left" and "right" not engaging with anything I discussed while accusing me of being in denial of "right wing populism" which is facially not the case. I don't "n
843.
by freejazz 1y ago
I'm not sure how your post doesn't fall for exactly what you claim to be criticizing. You do not engage with the substance of anything I said and instead just name call. I'm not talking about the route, I'm talking about
844.
by freejazz 1y ago
You think people were getting loan approvals because they were minorities? And that it was also at the cost of "disfavored groups"? Is there anything to back this up? Redlining was a real phenomenon. You might not agree with Coa
845.
by freejazz 1y ago
Where's Trump's socialized medicine plan? That's by far the most populist desire of populist America. It's very easy to get caught up in the name of things and not look at it substantively, which is what you seem to be a
846.
by freejazz 1y ago
I think if Trump just wanted people to swear loyalty statements instead of cutting all the funding, shutting all these departments, cancelling research, etc., they'd be unhappy but still fine with the fact that the research goes on...
847.
by freejazz 1y ago
Sorry, what's the difference between the former and the latter? My whole understanding of DEI is perfectly described by the thing you said is illegal. Otherwise, you did not describe what "DEI" is, so I hope you can understan
848.
by freejazz 1y ago
I don't think it's fair to call a car self-driving if the self-driving disengages itself every time its about to get into a nasty wreck because of its own actions. It's facially "self-driving except for when it's no
849.
by freejazz 1y ago
Is there something about Elon Musk and the other tech robber barons being russian assets as well that makes the whole notion stupid on its face? I can't tell what your point is. Are you being dismissive or do you just want to remind pe
850.
by freejazz 1y ago
This is exhausting in its stupidity.
851.
by freejazz 1y ago
Thanks, I think that information is valuable.
852.
by freejazz 1y ago
The question is not if they could, it is if they would.
853.
by freejazz 1y ago
Great question for a different litigation actually involving humans.
854.
by freejazz 1y ago
> I would be in no way surprised if these or virtually any other allegations a person might make turned out to be true Sure. That does seemingly contradict the notion that I should take the filings with a grain of salt, though. I shouldn
855.
by freejazz 2y ago
You do come off as very dismissive. It's kind of like JAQing off. You're not "just asking questions" you're "just offering suggestions." The suggestion here being that everyone take these kind of allegatio
856.
by freejazz 2y ago
>The "outcome" is simply that the judge simply directed the attorney to stop using the dragon watermark. Whats the problem? I think the poster was trying to make the point that in a "just" society, the story would be
857.
by freejazz 2y ago
>Those experts spent collective centuries learning their area of expertise, but the judge became familiar with everything over the course of this one trial... And? >I've provide an argument that it is not. You have provided an un
858.
by freejazz 2y ago
>You didn't read what I wrote and that is apparent in your response. I absolutely did read what you wrote. What I will not read is any of your response after this sentence.
859.
by freejazz 2y ago
I didn't say you said that. I asked if you thought that. Once again, that's a faciallly unreasonable response. Just to demonstrate that reasonable is a workable term that need not be this vague unlawful mystery that you decided is
860.
by freejazz 2y ago
Here's a great application of reasonable: your post is incredibly unreasonable. It's a long rant that is not based in the law, the application of "reasonability" in the law, or other examples of "good faith" st
861.
by freejazz 2y ago
Jeez, it's almost like cases are different from each other. It's almost like sometimes some laws are different from others. It might even then follow that when the facts are different, different outcomes can result from the applic
862.
by freejazz 2y ago
Do you think experts don't testify in civil cases? I find these really elaborate rants about the law, which are based on nothing but presumptions, and in this case, presumptions that do not even arise from actual personal experience, t
863.
by freejazz 2y ago
So Trump can defy the constitutional order because of how Duke bungled a case of rape accusations? I don't follow that.
864.
by freejazz 2y ago
One is complying with actual statutory law, the other is just ad hoc vengeance. You might not like it but one is an approach actually consistent with the constitutional order of power in this country and the other isn't. I'm so ex
865.
by freejazz 2y ago
In what way is what you raised a genuine question of constitutional law?
866.
by freejazz 2y ago
Do you understand that Congress has the power of the purse and the President does not?
867.
by freejazz 2y ago
It is dictatorial, not because one person gets to make the decision, but because the US constitution delineates the powers of the gov't, to which the President does not have this power. I really do not understand why this is such a h
868.
by freejazz 2y ago
>E.g. Next time a lawyer abandons your civil case and ghosts you after being clearly negligent and down-right bad in their representation. Good luck holding them accountable with any body without consequences. Are you talking about a per
869.
by freejazz 2y ago
Yeah but that's not easy, which is why it wasn't done in any of the cases where it's needed.
870.
by freejazz 2y ago
>I find this way of looking at LLMs to be odd. It's not about it being perfect or not. It's about how they come about with the responses they do. >Very few people seem to go around talking about how their binary classifier i

More ›