As far as I know virtually all forensics is invalid. I believe its just DNA analysis, that's got actual science behind it.
https://www.science.org/content/article/reversing-legacy-junk-science-courtroom
Does that include high-speed rail projects?
Whose a goots loaf?
You're a goots loaf!
Not that Ive ever heard of.
But Kagi makes it easy. It's called Personalized Search. It's so nice
Edit: Apparently DDG got rid of that feature.
Yes the idea isn't, that they aren't allowed to recommend anything. It's that they can be held accountable (I.E. sued) if what they recommend, leads to people being radicalized by a hate group, or attempting suicide from cyber bullying. Or even just extra tharapy from doom scrolling ourselves to sleep. Right now Section 230 says they can't be held liable for anything on their sites. Which is obviously stupid.
Those were my edits, they didn't use both
On one hand the Judge is right. On the other hand the lawyer is right. Then on two more hands, they're both wrong.
Yes, it's bad to legislate by moral panic. Yes, kids are addicted to social media. Those are both facts.
The reason age gating is a bad idea isn't because of moral panic, or "the children". It's because we're ALL addicted to social media. It isn't just the kids, it's adults as well. The problem is the intentionally addicting algorithms, meticulously engendered to keep us scrolling. I'm telling you in 50 years, we'll know how all the social media companies were hiding and lying, about the addictive harmful nature of their business; Just like we know about tobacco and oil companies today.
The best solution I can think of, is to revisit Section 230. You can't hold these companies responsible for what people post to their sites, but we can and must hold them accountable, for what they recommend! If you have a simple easily definable sorting or ranking system of what people choose to follow? You're fine, no accountability for something bad showing up. If you have some black box algorithm of infinite scrolling, based on a complex criteria that nobody can really break down and explain exactly why a specific post was shown to a specific individual? Now you're on the hook for what they see.
Judge Uses D&D’s Failure To Make Him Worship Satan, To ~~School~~ Teach Florida ~~On~~ About Social Media Moral Panics.
I think that's what they're trying to say
I still don't really understand why this one got so much hate. I enjoyed it more than most of the recent MCU movies.
That's what the local feed is for.
I'm constantly surprised by people who don't seem to understand what ALL means.
I think your questions are more complicated than you realize.
Are Autocracies more powerful than Democracies?
If you separate the form of government from the governing, yes autocracy is a superior form of government. A dictator can instantly marshal resources to face any threat, or completely shift an entire nation, if a direction becomes clearly wrong. The reason they don't work, is because the leader is always human. Humans make shit leaders, almost always. So distribution of power across a large number of people mitigates the risks of putting it all in one.
Are all democracies are doomed to fail?
Yes. Obviously. Everything eventually fails. The Sun will fail and take the earth with it.
Is the future of humanity, autocracy? For the rest of humanity's existence?
No. Obviously. Everything eventually fails. The Sun will fail and take the earth with it. I would hope humanity (or whatever species humanity evolves to) lives past that.
And if I identity as an extraterrestrial autonomous exploration and research unit, with a general mission directive of learning about humanity first hand?