I don’t think I’d be upset. He played Sulu well and I’m sure he know it. But now you can can have gay character on tv or in a movie and Star Trek has always been inclusive. And we’re re-doing the original so we’re not planning on slapping in new characters. Honestly Sulu kept being Takai in so many people’s minds that gay Sulu works well.

I think they think it empowers them.

Based on the wording I’m guessing it’s a gated community.

I recently freed my 8 year old human child from a gap in the couch.

Am lawyer.

We have basically three murders:

An intentional killing with Malice aforethought or premeditation as you put it.

An intentional killing in the Heat of passion lacking the premeditation.

An unintentional killing, manslaughter.

In Tennessee the middle on is called intentional manslaughter and that’s the one at play.

There are certainly cases where the jury has concluded at some point between bullet one and bukket six you formed the premeditation required.

deleted by creator

But that’s fundamentally a flawed argument. It’s more expensive becuase death penalty cases have more rights. Specifically in the US what is called “actual innocence” is not grounds for an appeal to a life sentence but is for a death penalty.

Ideally we would extend that everyone, not save a few bucks and justify continued incarceration of innocent people by noting “hey it’s not a death sentence.”

Imagine the scenario of an innocent person who can’t appeal becuase the trail was fair but would have been freed if they had been sentenced to death, but becuase of the judge or jury’s mercy, they are imprisoned for life.

That has happened here.

Not think a great argument for abolishing the death penalty since it fundamentally is just saying “it is way too expensive to let any prisoners appeal based on being innocent. We could save so much money if didn’t let anyone do that.”

I don’t know. I mean it’s probably a very bad model and these people are just being scammed for a gpt 3.0. I can’t say I like them but I still abhor a scam.

If only. If you google an AI specifically for litigation you’ll get websites selling weekly access for just shy of $500.

I often get very large pleading dumps immediately prior to a hearing instead of at a more logical time and I think it’s the pro se scrounging the money together for another fix of an expensive AI website.

I sincerely doubt it. Judges want to do justice. I think most people would call having a robot judge your pleadings and dismiss merit less claims as dystopian.

Even if it was just “parsing” that’s a layer between you and the judge. Probably also dystopian.

I can only speak to my field, which is legal. Incomprehensible but prolific drivel has always been something the court system has struggled with getting through. That same drivel is now pretty good at pleading generalities but it’s awful at detailing facts.

You can get past the first hurdle in the legal world and unlock a massive and expensive cascade which AI can also effectively navigate for you.

In essence, AI can, very effectively, take an incoherent unreasonable and often mentally unwell litigant and magnify the expense of getting rid of their frivolous claim by over 100.

It’s almost assuredly going to 1. Chock the system. 2. Force massive reallocation of resources in the judiciary 3. Thereby vastly increasing not decreasing legal work. And 4. End up with valid claims being killed in a massive change in judicial attitude toward “clear enough” pleadings as they struggle with an AI influx.

Is opera not a good alternative?

You are OutRAGious

In 2016 they had a coordinated and clear effort to undermine the election and get Hilary in the primary over Bernie. Trump won.

In 2024 they all agreed to not challenge Biden despite serious concerns the ones in the know must have had.

Thats twice now they rolled out the red carpet for trump and in both cases it was to make damn sure their preferred candidate won the primary voters be damned.

It really should be brought up each election because it seems like they really want to keep doing it.

I only heard about it when she put out a full nudity and penetration reinacment video. The reactions to that were certainly interesting.

“A murder should only have one victim. When Ratchett kills Daisy Armstrong, a dozen lives are broken, deformed, ended, THEY DEMAND JUSTICE! Of all these wounded souls, we must finally answer — who among them is a killer? Who takes up the knife? The answer is… no single one of you could have done it. Nor any pair. It could have only be done… by all of you."*

I love that Bing Crosby just refilmwd the same movie a decade in and called it a day.

That’s fundamentally missing the problem- sales of wine are down 1/5. They have a supply chain that isn’t moving. If you offer cheaper wine you likely won’t move enough more to make up the shortfall and the costs of production/storage ect.

My wife and I went out this year and the bill was $200 for a sit down Italian in our suburban town. I don’t even like Italian.

We did a tiki lounge more recently in the city and it was $150.

These are nicer ish places but like, that’s a lot.

You’ve heard of jumbo olives though right?