Interesting, my experience has been quite different but then it has been more with executives of relatively small (<500) and private companies. I’ve also seen some cases of companies closer to dictatorships, but they have (at least from my external perspective) seemed like dictators with at least clear visions. A small minority have been loudmouthed assholes.

Would you like to at least engage with the discourse a bit more, eg explain why the reason I have mentioned and other possible reasons are not good to you? Otherwise you’re not adding much to the conversation.

Beyond Need has indeed had sausages for quite awhile now.

Have you worked with very many CEOs at SMEs? Based on my experience it seems to match the description, by and large.

Hmm, why have you not responded to the substantive reasoning for the law? As a self-professed freedom advocate, well, that’s obviously a lie so do you actually have something of value to add or are you just trolling?

AlphaFold’s success seems to be largely linked to its use of attention-based architecture, similar to GPT, i.e. the architecture used by LLMs. Beyond that, they are both building on work in machine learning and statistics, so I don’t think they are nearly as independent as you are making out.

Despite all the downvotes, I think it’s a reasonable enough question. It happens to have a very reasonable answer though.

First of all, your concern is largely addressed, since immigration control can still access law enforcement databases if they have a warrant.

As for why this law exists at all, well it’s actually to the benefit of law enforcement: the idea is that immigrant communities are more likely to cooperate with law enforcement if they aren’t scared that they will be the target of immigration control. This is all the more practical now, when ICE has degraded into a largely lawless and authoritarian organization, since you can imagine most immigrants wouldn’t want to say a word to any police officer unless they at least have the protections of the 2017 TRUST act in place.

Now, what I’m a bit confused about is why you are so up-in-arms about the existence of this law instead of the violation of this law. Surely if you are so law-abiding as you make out to be in your comments, you should be shouting for legal action against the police officers involved in breaking the law.

Lol dude I am also not arguing about the main point, my contention is that you’re being uppity with phrasing when you are in fact entirely wrong. If you’re gonna be a grammar Nazi you have to at least be correct.

edit: ah nevermind I understand from your most recent comment that you’re just trolling

No, we are taking about violence in a region, which can have many causes and origins. Violence in the region has stemmed from a combination of religion and foreign interference (and presumably many other things). If this isn’t what your claim addresses, then your claim is irrelevant to this conversation.

Lol what are you talking about? Many things can have a stem, such as a plant, which is not the same as the stem itself. According to all major dictionaries, stem can mean the main trunk of a plant, but it can also mean other certain plant part providing support. So your claim doesn’t hold.

Some definitions include the word “main”… and many definitions don’t. So actually I don’t see anything necessarily indicating that there can only be one stem.

Of course it can—why do you think something can’t have multiple stems? No one said that it stems exclusively from one thing.

Alright friend, OP certainly never implied “giving government ubiquitous control over the food supply” by any means, so at least this is clearly a simple case of strawman fallacy.

edit: like if you think about it for literally more than two seconds, you’ll realize that OP’s idea involved building capacity amongst the general population for horticulture, something which fundamentally opposes the idea of giving government ubiquitous control.

Is there a name for the fallacy that something is doomed to fail just because some quasi-communist state tried to implement something similar at some point?

Fair enough, that seems accurate!

You seem to be assuming that this idea would have to solve all food consumed by everyone. No one is making that assumption except for you.

Only available for children in the summer… I don’t think this isn’t the solution being proposed.

Tbh in my experience LLM and other recently developed techniques such as stable diffusion are referred to as GenAI by most lay people. For both lay people and technical audience, i.e. people who work in machine learning, AI has a much broader significance.

Most people on Lemmy seem to define AI as “evil machine learning that i don’t like” vs non-AI as everything else. It’s a wee bit delusional.

Honestly I don’t see them complaining nor are they pretending that it’s uniquely male. I just don’t see any words to support that. Do you think you might be reading a bit too much into it?