Because they’re arguing in bad faith.
Because they’re arguing in bad faith.
Oh, is it because decades of incompetence and corruption weakened their already crumbling military? Their lack of a strong economy to support the war effort? Is it because they’re relying on Soviet leftovers instead of modern equipment? The fact their enemy is a motivated, supplied with actually decent munitions by modern/rich countries, and has a competent chain of command?
What do I win?
They’re not insane: everything they’ve done are things they sincerely thought they could get away with, and up until Ukraine Putin has been correct in that regard.
Pretending to be crazy is an effective strategy: ironically Nixon popularized it during the cold war.
Attacking targets in NATO countries (even if “justified”) is going to drastically increase the odds NATO gets directly involved in Ukraine – something Putin absolutely doesn’t want.
deleted by creator
You know it’s bad when you recognize the user name.
You can’t just mention D&D and Satanic Panic without sharing the Chick Tract.
You know you’re old when young people confidently explain to you things you witnessed first hand. Like Dee Snyder testifying in a Senate hearing.
There is a reason China has banned most US-based software in the mainland
I’m not at all saying what the USA is doing is right, but I find it hilarious Beijing is upset about it.
“It’s only OK when we do it!!!”
Also Disney once told a family no multiple times regarding putting Spider-Man on their dead child’s tombstone.
This is one of those situations where it’s better to ask forgiveness than permission. Even the most cold-hearted corporate ghoul is going to understand the cost/benefit of going after that family isn’t remotely worth it.
Yeah, the lawyers are going to say “no”. But even if they’re stupid enough to sue: some suit that isn’t a moron is going to tell them to drop it during the ensuing PR nightmare, and the family will be swimming in donations.
While a trite example, in the recent Barbie film
You mean self aware, hyperbolic satire?
They know there have been women on the supreme court. It was a reference to second wave feminism, and inverted because that was the joke.
… I thought Lunix was invented by the infamous Soviet computer hacker Linyos Torovoltos.
Any work made to convey a concept and/or emotion can be art. I’d throw in “intent”, having “deeper meaning”, and the context of its creation to distinguish between an accounting spreadsheet and art.
The problem with AI “art” is it’s produced by something that isn’t sentient and is incapable of original thought. AI doesn’t understand intent, context, emotion, or even the most basic concepts behind the prompt or the end result. Its “art” is merely a mashup of ideas stolen from countless works of actual, original art run through an esoteric logic network.
AI can serve as a tool to create art of course, but the further removed from the process a human is the less the end result can truly be considered “art”.