circuscritic

If I had a nickel...

That wasn't built around agentic AI integration.

This will be.

At best, DDG results are only 33% less shitty than Google's, but the UI is 2000% better.

Is it bad optics? Absolutely.

But anyone who earns an actual paycheck should be on the same team, or at least given the benefit of the doubt.

The enemy makes their money by simply having money, that's not what this is.

Why do these studies include YouTube as a social media network?

Might as well include Medium.

The judge also revealed for the first time that one body-worn camera video captured an immigration agent using the AI tool ChatGPT to “compile a narrative for a report based on a brief sentence about an encounter and several images.”

“To the extent that agents use ChatGPT to create their use of force reports, this further undermines their credibility and may explain the inaccuracy of these reports when viewed in light of the BWC footage,” Ellis wrote.

Quick, someone check if this violates ChatGPT's TOS!

I don't necessarily disagree, but the fact they walked back the original policy because it was so unpopular leads me to believe they are trying to save face by implementing a PITA way of enabling unknown sources, such as through ADB.

The reason why I suspect that is because even with the original policy change, they were still going to allow unsigned apps to be installed via ADB.

But I guess we'll just have to wait and find out.

They reversed course, so it's not an immediate issue.

But to answer your question, they would have provided an OS update to only allows app installations from verified developers, no matter the source.

To get verified developers have to submit identification to Google and go through a Google process.

So it wouldn't matter if the install source was a third-party repo, or Google Play, the system would not have installed any applications not signed by a Google authorized certificate.

That becomes very problematic because it gives Google the ability to restrict applications outside of the Google Play Store ecosystem.

They were copying Apple's playbook from the EU wherein Apple was legally mandated to allow third-party app stores, and in response Apple required all apps to be signed by an Apple verified developer certificate, no matter the repo.

And wouldn't you know it, Apple either revoked or would not provide certificates to developers of apps Apple didn't like, such as BitTorrent clients.

As much as I appreciate your armchair terrorism PhD, the most likely answer is that he had severe PTSD from his participation in a CIA death squad, where he killed his own people in Afghanistan, including children.

How many American veterans have come back with PTSD and lashed out with gun violence?

Is it possible he was reactivated, or coerced, by a nefarious actor to achieve said bad actors political aims?

Sure, but you're making a lot of conclusions based on little to no evidence, and flatly ignoring or dismissing other more likely explanations.

By all means float the possibility that this is part of some conspiracy, but don't pretend that you have definitive evidence that gives you just cause for excluding all other possibilities, especially the possibilities that already fit into the existing American cycle of foreign wars and domestic gun violence.

For example, what if one of his friends or family members were recently deported? Or if he was enraged that after betraying his native homeland, he saw America under Trump descending into fascism and decided to lash out by shooting American military members inside America's Capital?

You're hung up on his choice pistol, but how close do you think he could have gotten to his targets with a long gun in the streets of DC? How long could he have walked in DC with an AR-15 slung over his back?

Or what if he couldn't afford a long gun? Or had other issues purchasing one?

There are many more reasonable explanations for this situation then your comments would lead people to believe, which is my point.

I will say this in your defense of your theory, he is such a terrible choice for a false flag operation, as evidenced by the immediate New York Times article about his CIA background, that it would fit my preconception of just how incompetent a Trump administration false flag attack would be.

I still think it's one of the lesser likely possibilities, but again, I'm not dismissing that it is possible, just that there are other more likely explanations.

You think he was contracted to sow chaos as part of a false flag operation, with a handgun?

Also, terrorist attacks are generally premeditated by design.

It makes sense because of symbolism. An attack in DC is different than attack anywhere else in the country.

If his aims were political, then of course he would go there, and not Portland, or California.

None of this means he was of a sound mind, and I would say his upbringing means that he most likely not very well adjusted, how could he be?

Whether that extends to some specific diagnosis of mental illness, such as PTSD, I can't speak to.