Imo, the great thing about mint is stability first. You can tinker with it, but it’s generally about being able to plug it in, and get started using your device with as little puttering around as possible. It tends to be one of, if not the, most out of the box easy to install on any hardware.

Yes, it lags a little behind since it’s a derivative distro, and they tend to keep packages stable over recent. If you need more recent packages, it can suck since you’ll have more work to do to get it set up. But the average user doesn’t really need need bleeding edge stuff.

Then you’ve got their flagship DE, cinnamon. Again, right from install, it’s usable, visually easy, and pretty much bug free. But it still has enough depth of features to play with if you want.

When I started exploring Linux as win10 started being more and more obviously something I wasn’t going to like, I tried a bunch of distros on multiple machines. Mint ended up being the most reliable on all of them. By the time I was picking up enough background to be able to move to something else and make it work, mint was still doing what I needed, so I only play around with distros when I’m gifted old hardware and patch something together out of it. And I end up going to mint on those because there’s really nothing better for my needs, and I like it.

Ummmm, who’s going to tell them?

Slowly. With loose clothing. And we ain’t even tropical.

Neither.

IDGAF if anyone remembers, and I ain’t reminding anyone.

About the only thing I care about regarding my birthday is being allowed to nap without interruption lol.

I think you misunderstand what’s happening.

It isn’t that, as an example to represent the idea, openai is training their models on kiddie porn.

It’s that people are taking ai software, and then training it on their existing material. The wired article even specifically says they’re issuing older versions of the software to bypass safeguards that are in place to prevent it now.

This isn’t to say that any of the companies involved in offering generative software don’t have such imagery in the data used to train their models. But they wouldn’t have to possess it for it to be in there. Most of those assholes just grabbed giant datasets and plugged them in. They even used scrapers for some of it. So all it would take is them accessing some of it unintentionally for their software to end up able to generate new material. They don’t need to store anything once the software is trained.

Currently, none of them lack some degree of prevention in their products to prevent it being used for that. How good those protections are, I have zero clue. But they’ve all made noises about it.

But don’t forget, one of the earlier iterations of software designed to identify kiddie porn was trained on seized materials. The point of that is that there are exceptions to possession. The various agencies that investigate sexual abuse of minors tend to keep materials because they need it to track down victims, have as evidence, etc. It’s that body of data that made detection something that can be automated. While I have no idea if it happened, it wouldn’t be surprising if some company or another did scrape that data at some point. That’s just a tangent rather than part of your question.

So, the reason that they haven’t been “sued” is that they likely don’t have any materials to be “sued” for in the first place.

Besides, not all generated materials are made based on existing supplies. Some of it is made akin to a deepfake, where someone’s face is pasted onto a different body. So, they can take materials of perfectly legal adults that look young, slap real or fictional children’s faces onto them, and have new stuff to spread around. That doesn’t require any original material at all. You could, as I understand it, train an generative model on that and it would turn out realistic fully generative materials. All of that is still illegal, but it’s created differently.

Okay, let’s be fucking real here. This is not a first amendment issue at all. Never has been, never will be.

There’s no constitutional lawyers making that claim that don’t work for someone paying them to.

Nobody’s speech is being limited. One specific platform is being removed. One of many. That’s it.

Dude, how many times are you going to ask this?

Dammit. Now I gotta do this to fuck with my kid

You know, there’s some good eatin on one of them things.

But, probably not.

Reptiles don’t pile on mass the way mammals do. The greatest limitation to tortoise speed isn’t muscle anyway. It’s bone structure and metabolism.

Strapping weight ain’t gonna get mr tarpin swole, he just gonna be tired.

Well, you run into a lot of trouble.

Part of the abortion debate is centred on when, exactly, a bunch of cells can be called a person.

There’s no significant group arguing that it happens after the baby is out of the womb and surviving.

There’s rules in place for what happens when that new person can’t survive on its own, particularly when that’s combined with an inability to ever function as more than a lump.

So, the problem becomes one of deciding when, after that period, that child needs to be given the right to choose for themselves if they want to live or not. There’s already the ability to just not sustain life, but if you’re gong to be making the choice to end that life, you gotta get consensus on whether or not someone gets to decide it for them.

Now, I’m a long term right to death advocate. I consider the ability to choose the manner and time of our own deaths a right, one that is typically repressed, unjustly so

But when you’re taking someone else’s, there’s a much higher standard involved. In order to take someone’s life legally, you have to jump through some serious hoops under normal circumstances. It’s usually only allowed after they do something very bad (by the standards of the legal system making the decision).

So, how and why are the parents making that decision? Why are they making it alone? Why not wait until the child is older and can decide for themselves? When is someone old enough?

There’s more things that need to be addressed before you could even remotely hope to build consensus and make it legal.

And, from my perspective the answer is a hell no. You, me, everyone, has the right to decide the manner and time of our death (within reason). But we do not have the right to decide it for someone else.

With that in mind, it is a decision that should only be made before adulthood in the most extreme cases, where suffering is assured, and early death inevitable.

Beyond that, there are just too many problems, the same as there are with capital punishment.

Euthanasia is a difficult topic, period. Even with the right to death, are we going to obligate someone else to assist? A lot of people seeking a medical end of life can’t take their own. So they need assistance. When you’re involving someone that can’t decide for themselves (and if someone isn’t deemed capable of voting then they’re not capable of choosing in this), you can’t obligate a doctor to do the job. Nobody should be obligated to take someone else’s life.

So, nah. If you’re an adult, you should have the right, but until then, nobody else should. It still has problems, and you listed the worst of them already. But those problems are not as bad as ending someone’s life without their informed consent. Kids can’t form that for much of anything.

I mean, it’s a thing. You can look it up and find documentation on it. It’s in the DSM-5, the main diagnostic tome for mental health. Here’s an overview in a reputable source. It’s listed as cannabis induced psychosis though.

It isn’t exactly a super common thing relative to total population, and there’s a good bit of debate about exactly how much of it is purely an affect in people already prone to psychosis or schizophrenia, and how much is causative. However, I’ve never seen any research into whether it’s 100% about the weed, or if it’s related to other things that are in the weed, and/or if it would be set off by anything that tweaked dopamine in a similar way.

There are other drugs known to trigger psychosis and schizophrenia, and they don’t necessarily work the exact same way. So there’s a good chance that if you don’t have an unusually high chance to end up there, that you won’t, no matter how much you smoke. But there’s just not enough data to be certain.

What is certain is that it isn’t just scaremongering. It may be used to try and scaremonger, but that’s a different thing.

The numbers I’ve seen are low enough that you might go decades in ER work and never see it because it isn’t instant. You won’t really know if it’s CIP until a patient history has been taken, other tests run, etc. So the comments talking about ER veterans not having seen it are irrelevant. They wouldn’t be in on the diagnosis. Now, someone in a psych unit might have a useful anecdote about never having seen it during their career. But it’s also not an all day every day thing.

It’s a relatively infrequent event. Even in a big city, you might see a hundred cases a year that can be definitely diagnosed, and it won’t all be at the same hospital.

However, if anyone working in an ER says they’ve never seen anyone in for any cannabis related issues, they’re either lying, or didn’t work there long. People get greened out, or get a bad trip, or get stuff that’s laced often enough that you’ll see it if you even do part time in an ER. It won’t be every day, or even every week (or it didn’t used to), but the rate of such occurrence is increasing as legalization spreads access and the willingness to both seek help and be honest. That’s a fact you can look up, you don’t have to trust anyone.

Cannabis is a plant with around a dozen potent psychoactive components. That’s why people use it. To assume that everyone is going to react the same to them, in varying proportions, at betting varying levels is just stupid. You can have something as mild as aspirin, perfectly controlled during manufacture for potency, and still have the occasional weird response.

Doesn’t matter how you take it in, you can’t accurately predict your response until you’ve taken it in the first time, and even then you’d need more use to really call it accurate. Then you can still run into weird shit, or laced shit, or shit that’s just way stronger than you’re used to.

Me? I have unpleasant reactions to the stuff, so I don’t use it. I wish I could because it can do great things for people. If I had a history psychosis or schizophrenia in my family, I wouldn’t even stay around where it’s being smoked or used in a way it could get into my system. Just not worth it, because it can happen, and it is most definitely a real thing, no matter how poorly researched it is currently.

Depends.

In metal general, if you’re making the coffee + milk, then adding ice, you have to make the coffee part “strong” in one way or another, because that ice is going to melt. It’ll melt fast, too, at the beginning, so not adjusting your process is going to lead to weak, watery iced lattes.

If you then reduce the ice, the problem goes in reverse where the concentration of coffee compounds is higher, so it doesn’t taste like it’s expected to taste.

Now, some places chill batches of the espresso, mix it with the milk chilled, and the ice is just there to extend the time it’s cold, with an expectation of less melt.

Afaik, dunkin doesn’t have a chilled container of the latte shipped in, or made in bulk. They could have changed from the last time I talked to anyone that worked there, but at the time it was in smaller batches and stored at the temp it came out in. So if they changed the amount of ice, it would change the finished drink.

If you make your own iced latte, you’ll likely just make it regular, then pour it over ice. It’ll be thinner, and it’s up to you how you like that or not. Stores tend to go for consistency between products as a priority, so they don’t have as much freedom.

Another thing to carry.

Mind you, I’m a fairly preparedness focused EDC guy. My backpack has a 24 hour supply of most of the things I’d need, plus stuff to help get by for a little longer.

If I threw a thermos in there on top of my water supply and bare minimum rations, that’s a full pack.

Most people don’t have a pack to shove the thermos into, and aren’t going to realistically carry one around on a strap or in their hand.

And, eventually, it runs empty. To counter that, you have to go bigger, which is heavier and bulkier.

Like it or not, places that serve food and drink are going to exist because nobody can carry everything everywhere all the time.

It’s one of those things where it depends on the computer. My old box that’s running win 7 has nothing but music and backed up media files on it, isn’t connected to the internet at all, and there’s really no point to it being encrypted.

My laptop leaves the house, and is connected, so it gets the treatment. My general purpose PC is, though that was more just because of a random choice rather than a carefully chosen decision. I figured I’d try it for a few weeks, then nuke it if it was a problem. It hasn’t been, and I haven’t needed to do anything to it that would require a change.

The other people in the house have chosen not to.

I’m not certain I would encrypt my main desktop again, just because it’s one more thing to do, and I’m getting lazy lol. I don’t have any sensitive files at all, and if things in the world get so bad that some agency is after me, I’m going to be hiding out up in this holler I know, not worrying about leaving a computer behind. Won’t be power anyway, and the only shit they’d find is some pirated files.

I’d be more worried about my phone and my main tablet than any of the PCs, and those would either go with me, or get melted down before I left. Thermite is cheap and easy.

The problem is that the container is evidence.

Even if planted, what does a cop do with evidence? They take it from the person. They’ll usually do so with their hands.

If they’re not wearing gloves, they can still explain away those prints by dint of touching them while taking them as evidence. If they’re wearing gloves, the only way they’d leave prints is if they weren’t while they were getting the container ready, but then they can still claim to have handled it without gloves at some point

It’s an impossible to prove claim unless there’s other evidence supporting the claim.

Since most court systems default to a cop being a credible witness instead of them having to back up their claims with other evidence, you’re fucked.

So it’s a bad defense. To make it stick, you have such a barrier to break down just to try to gain supporting evidence that you ain’t gonna be doing it from jail unless you’re rich.

Not that nobody tries. They do. It’s essentially a waste of time, but people will claim that evidence is planted. It’s just extremely rare for it to work, even when there is supporting evidence. It’s also a trope, so getting a jury to believe the claim is hard. You see it in movies and shows so often where the hero cop arrests someone with drugs and they say that it isn’t theirs, it’s planted.

Copaganda is a thing, and it works. Because it’s such a common trope, people have the idea that it’s something only claimed by people that are obviously lying. It doesn’t help that if you’re the kind of person to take the claim seriously, and take the other evidence into account, there’s a lower chance of you being on the jury. Jury selection, any prosecutor is going to ask questions that will find folks predisposed to a bias against their case. Same with defense lawyers wanting to exclude those against their defense

That’s not exclusive to drug cases, but drug cases are such that it’s easier for fake evidence do be planted. It’s very hard to fake a weapon in a murder case because testing can be used to exclude things. But a bag of drugs? Much easier to fake things. Hell, a cop wanting to do it, all they have to do is wear gloves, then push the baggie against the hands of the person, and now the planting claim is harder to prove

No, no, thoughts like that are the entire point of the internet, and language itself

I dunno, but some other brother might deny

Well, it turns out that I’m particularly good at explaining maths, up to algebra. I’ve helped family go from bad grades to good ones via tutoring, eventually to the point that they no longer needed me to be able to get good grades on their own.

Same with english, usually. The caveat to that one being literature not always working out right because a teacher wanting specific answers rather than the students showing their comprehension and analysis. But, if I was teaching, that wouldn’t be an issue.

Sure as hell couldn’t take anyone past high school levels in either, though I could likely teach creative writing at intro levels (which really isn’t that hard at all)

The real issue is the stuff you have to do to be a teacher. It isn’t as easy as understanding the subject, or being good at conveying that subject. There’s a lot of planning involved, you’ve got tight time limits, there’s paperwork and administrative tasks. That’s not even covering the stuff for special needs students, or being able to match expectations of language and discipline.

So, while it turns out I’m a damn good tutor, I’d make a lousy teacher in a structured environment. Most of us would, even (and sometimes especially) the full on experts in a subject.

I will say though, teaching can be incredibly fun. I’m not talking the rewarding part, where you see someone getting better, or the pride in taking part in that. It’s the process itself, of taking an idea, breaking it down, and then translating it to someone else in a way that works for them. That’s not just a school subject thing, I’ve taught martial arts stuff here and there over the years, along with other things that were more piecemeal (like shading when drawing, but not necessarily other techniques). The process itself is just fun.

Groups are harder, obviously, and I’ve never liked time limits on things. If it takes an entire week to transfer the knowledge, or a month, or whatever, the important part is the learning to me. The bigger the group, the less realistic time you have per lesson, so it can end up being much harder to convey something to the point of retention the way you can do it with 1 on 1 instruction. It’s one of those things where the longer your have between lessons, the less likely you are to transfer the skill because the student forgets.

I’m still butthurt that I wasn’t able to teach in my field of work. If I had been able to, it would have added years, maybe a decade to my working life. But they don’t allow it anywhere that I’m aware of, so meh.

Chowchow is a southern thing mostly.

There’s a brand called Mrs Campbell’s that’s almost as good as some homemade. Runs a little sweeter than most homemade, but not horribly so.

It’s kind of like sauerkraut and kimchi had a baby.

A lot of folks will have it on everything they eat, even stuff like steak that shouldn’t have much on it at all. It is versatile though. Burgers, beans, fried fish, salads, sandwiches, soups, you name it and it tends to go well.

Oh, my fucking gods!

I’m taking a break from shoving a biscuit with cheese and the branston into my maw to say thank you.

This stuff is bonkers. Sweet, salty, tangy, hints of bitterness, and plenty of umami. It’s like the perfect flavor bomb.

This stuff could remove chowchow from its throne as the most versatile pickled product. It’s different from chowchow, and those differences are (I think) going to let it enhance more things as well as being amazing on its own.

Thank you so much for suggesting it!