sunbytes

"Corporate death penalty" is not that much of a punishment. Humans committed crimes, but will essentially only have their income reduced.

How about some sentencing for the people who made the decisions? They willingly did things knowing they would endanger, ruin and end lives.

If you endanger a life or cause someone to he killed, there's specific crimes you'd get tried for.

I both love and loathe the increasing and evolving repulsiveness of the wojacks.

Profits are already eaten up by executive bonuses and salaries.

It's regular salaries that eat into those, and that's what they're trying to protect.

Improvements take time.

It's possible he's collected (or even just invoiced) the money, but the work is still being planned/completed.

So the reasoning I heard about this is she did this to annoy her boyfriend who loved sports.

She deliberately made it an unbalanced rule because she knew it would really annoy him.

At the time, I doubt she knew the book would become a cultural icon, nor that most of the English-speaking world would know what the word "Quidditch" meant.

I misread this as "I am 9".

And I thought, "well, I've got bad news for you, pal".

There's still books I need to read

L'Nux

I watched a great video the other day with ai voice, but the creator had a disclaimer at the start saying (in his natural voice) that he thought his accent was too strong for people.

All the comments (barring a few chuds) were people encouraging him to just use his natural voice as it was perfectly understandable and the AI voice was quite jarring in comparison.

So yeah even as an accessibility tool, I think people just find natural voices more trustworthy.

If it's a choice between the two, sure.

But let's play the odds here.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the councillor did it themselves to demonize the anti-data-center people

I'm looking forward to the top looking less tarnished than the bottom in a few years.