XeroxCool

Maybe if they didn't think of their wives as property, they wouldn't be so worried about their wives' autonomy.

Dept of Education? D O Emissions? Can't figure it out even with some searching

A deer will shatter your nose fairing and snap handlebars at speed. The next object to catch the deer is your head and torso. No, the burly batwing fairings on a full dresser cruiser are not any stronger than the nose cone on a sport bike when it comes to a 200lb meat bag approaching at 70mph.

So many myths perpetuated by people who bucked classes and PRACTICE in favor of their uncle's advice.

Exactly this. If you commute by car, this is likely the first time in 9+ hours that you're not expected to perform for someone. Navigate traffic, do your job, navigate traffic. Some people can decompress and turn off in public transportation, but not everyone - and anyone driving from the station is probably navigating a shitty traffic pattern at the hub, adding to the stress of a short drive.

Me, I did it for all that plus feeling listless and like there's no value in actually going inside. I'm gonna go to my chair and sit on my phone. So why do the walk? Why pass my parents and give some undetailed recount of my day at work? Why deal with a dog happy to see me again today and have to put mental resources into reciprocating when I don't feel like it? Why see if my girlfriend wants to get dinner (and pick where) when I know it's going to be 20 minutes of "I don't know"? There can be so much stress with going into your home that for a few more minutes, everyone will assume you're still driving but you can just clam up by yourself.

The portion of the global population that experiences fall colors is somewhat high, but I never really thought about how little of the world's land sees it. Northeast north america, half of Europe, and part of China. Warmer places don't make trees go into winter mode and colder places don't support deciduous trees as well. It can't be too dry for them, either, which precludes much of the southern hemisphere. So it happens across the globe mostly in the same couple of months

I read this as you saying OP's claim was a fallacy but a re-read (and small dive into what type of Xerox you are) makes me beleive you meant binary thinking itself is a logical fallacy

I think you're falsely categorizing action as binary thinking and supporting OP's thought. Say I want to help people with some extra money - I have $100 (in singles) to give and 5 people in need. I'm not locked into "giving or not giving" or stuck giving to 1 person and not giving to 4 people. I can give everyone $20 evenly. I can $10 to one and $90 to another. I can give $5, $15, $25, $25, and $30 to them based on apparent need. I can give $0. Dividing this up into 5 individual binary actions... Actually, 100 individual actions (each dollar), dishonestly represents the overall opportunity and outcome.

And that's just for one case where it's a zero-sum game with my limited pot of $100. That's a prime type of case where some majority groups would beleive anything not directly given to them is, effectively, taken from them - more binary thinking. That doesn't account for status change, further income, and understand that social welfare budgets are insanely smaller than the gratuitous budgets of other departments.

They're just saying it in a jovial, not so serious tone lol. Maybe you should lighten up lol

You can answer this yourself. Get rid of your phone and see. If you beleive it's not a necessity, don't say "yeah I could do these alternative things to get by". Actually do it. I hope you're not job-shopping

AI isn't useless, but it's current forms are just rebranded algorithms with every company racing to get theirs out there. AI is a buzzword for tools that were never supposed to be labeled AI. Google has been doing summary excerpts for like a decade. People blindly trusted it and always said "Google told me". I'd consider myself an expert on one particular car and can't tell you how often those "answers" were straight up wrong or completely irrelevant to one type of car (hint, Lincoln LS does not have a blend door so heat problems can't be caused by a faulty blend door).

You cite Google searches and summarization as it's strong points. The problem is, if you don't know anything about the topic or not enough, you'll never know when it makes mistakes. When it comes to Wikipedia, journal articles, forum posts, or classes, mistakes are possible there too. However, those get reviewed as they inform by knowledgeable people. Your AI results don't get that review. Your AI results are pretending to be master of the universe so their range of results is impossibly large. That then goes on to be taken is pure fact by a typical user. Sure, AI is a tool that can educate, but there's enough it proves it gets wrong that I'd call it a net neutral change to our collective knowledge. Just because it gives an answer confidently doesn't mean it's correct. It has a knack for missing context from more opinionated sources and reports the exact opposite of what is true. Yes, it's evolving, but keep in mind one of the meta tech companies put out an AI that recommended using Elmer's glue to hold cheese to pizza and claimed cockroaches live in penises. ChatGPT had it's halluconatory days too, it just got forgotten due to Bard's flop and Cortana's unwelcome presence.

Use the other two comments currently here as an example. Ask it to make some code for you. See if it runs. Do you know how to code? If not, you'll have no idea if the code works correctly. You don't know where it sourced it from, you don't know what it was trying to do. If you can't verify it yourself, how can you trust it to be accurate?

The biggest gripe for me is that it doesn't understand what it's looking at. It doesn't understand anything. It regurgitates some pattern of words it saw a few times. It chops up your input and tries to match it to some other group of words. It bundles it up with some generic, human-friendly language and tricks the average user into believing it's sentient. It's not intelligent, just artificial.

So what's the use? If it was specifically trained for certain tasks, it'd probably do fine. That's what we really already had with algorithmic functions and machine learning via statistics, though, right? But sparsing the entire internet in a few seconds? Not a chance.

Edit: can't beleive I there'd a their

At least it was outside. Better out than in, I always say

I thought they canceled a contract for an outsourced system