I hear you, but this is subjective and not objective. A bad faith actor, presumably an authoritarian government, can exploit laws like this to advance their agenda. “Yes, I was definitely convinced that was George HW Bush”.
Subjective judgements are ripe for abuse of power, sadly.
Good things phones all work with Galieleo
It’s a slippery slope from something that is otherwise well intentioned.
Define what a deep fake is over a parody or other political commentary.
I’ll offer a near miss.
Chat amongst colleagues over a coffee, the topic was something very normal and mundane: how lazy are we about cooking.
My colleague Carol said, “sometimes I just throw some chicken nuggets in the toaster because I don’t care or have the energy”
My response I intercepted between the brain and mouth: “living the bachelor lifestyle, carol?”
Carol’s husband had died quite suddenly 6 months prior. I didn’t fuck up, but I almost did and it haunts me still over a decade later.
Lol I’m going to call bullshit.
You mean to tell me that all of Denmark, with the exception of Fyn, is absolute nuclear, but Fyn is stem?
Does not compute.
What a bloody insufferable cunt
My situation is I have an ability to recall a lot of really old information and some of it seemingly mundane. I can also synthesize all this together to make a good decision quickly.
This is basically what learning is, but it’s a broader base I can pull from and the process is just faster.
I don’t do well with forcing specific information to be cataloged. This means I wasn’t a great student in classes where you needed to just remember things (eg history).
The other thing I’ve got going for me is being able to visually see things in my head. It might be memories, but it’s also things for solving problems like this https://www.intelligencetest.com/questions/visualization/medium/3/8.html
4 looks too spork like. No thanks
Head of 2, body of 5.
I’m gonna fuck a waffle, marry pancakes, and kill french toast.
Like who even invited french toast to breakfast.
Yeah it’s really there to guide how fucked up it can be and not really be mega prescriptive. It’s not like quantities are on there, either.
Ideally a fire department shows up, sees the signs and then gets in contact with the building owner to start being more specific about what’s ahead of them before they just start dumping a ton of water on the building.
Section 4.2.3.3 of NFPA 704 guides how to handle multiple chemicals.
You can combine the worst of each category into a composite, list each individually, or do a hybrid option.
The posts saying there are two chemicals are true but likely incomplete… There are probably several different chemicals and they decided to go with the hybrid method.
My guess is that they combined the worst rating of everything that doesn’t need special handling, and have a stand alone for the chemical that is incompatible with water (or even combined for several chemicals that are incompatible with water).
Isn’t that one of the clear use cases?
They did not. They had radar, which was removed.
You should let her know so you can make your way into the next printing
My personal thoughts are:
That money should then be used for:
To boost the bottom:
“However, one of the 14 crew members on the Portuguese-flagged Solong cargo ship is missing, the vessel’s owner Ernst Russ says.”
The Solong.
The universe is trolling us.
Did that with star wars ep 7, 8, 9. Of course there was stuff I didn’t love but I didn’t walk away from the movie feeling robbed.
This is super duper protected political speech. So, no, it’s not illegal.
There are rules for when sentencing occurs concurrently or consecutively. Additionally the prosecution should want the most charges possible, in the event that an appeal overturns (or orders a new trial on) only a few of the indicted charges.