It would be funny if elon was actually only worth 400 million and not 400 billion.

Incidentally, his net worth has dropped below 400 billion to 398 billion since i last checked. Is he losing money? Is this anything to do with tesla stock?, because roughly 2 billion is a serious amount of money

That’s it! I was sleepily writing my comment, having not long woken up this morning, with a thought in the back of my mind that i couldn’t reach.

Perfect analogy!

He wasn’t quite as confident with doing it as musk.

Thats kinda funny.

You are mistaken, you were with his evil counterpart, waluigi! I was with luigi, riding a mighty scots pine as it floated down the rivers of british columbia.

100% agree.

I dont think there is no place for AI as an aid to help you find the solution, but i dont think it’s going to help you learn if you just ask it for the answers.

For example, yesterday, i was trying to find out why a policy map on a cisco switch wasn’t re-activating after my radius server came back up. Instead of throwing my map at the AI and asking whats wrong l, i asked it details about how a policy map is activated, and about what mechanism the switch uses to determine the status of the radius server and how a policy map can leverage that to kick into gear again.

Ultimately, AI didn’t have the answer, but it put me on the right track, and i believe i solved the issue. It seems that the switch didnt count me adding the radius server to the running config as a server coming back alive but if i put in a fake server and instead altered the IP to a real server then the switch saw this as the server coming back alive and authentication started again.

In fact, some of the info it gave me along the way was wrong. Like when it tried to give me cli commands that i already knew wouldn’t work because i was using the newer C3PL AAA commands, but it was mixing them up with the legacy commands and combining them together. Even after i told it that was a made-up command and why it wouldn’t work, it still tried to give me the command again later.

So, i dont think it’s a good tool for producing actual work, but it can be a good tool to help us learn things if it is used that way. To ask “why” and “how” instead of “what.”

Have you tried getting a pet?

Having another life to care for can give your life meaning.

I wish i could add childishness to my pihole blacklist.

Seriously, think about what you are angry about here. Is this what matters to you?

Sorry, that isn’t what I was trying to say. It’s not about “letting the bully do it” (which isn’t what i said at all, so i dont know why you put it in quotation marks)

It’s just a name. It’s nothing. Better to fight him on denying trans people, or taking away rights from women, or reversing climate change deals, or letting a lizard faced man child dismantle the federal governement, or promoting racism, and nazi-ism.

The name of a fucking body of water means absolutely nothing compared to some of the shit he is pulling.

I dont think being concerned with the name of the gulf matters at all compared to this.

Did you see recently the thing about plastic straws? That he wants to bring back plastic straws? This is the kind of thing he wants to change! Trump is a complete moron and he is causing a crazy amount of damage to the US and the rest of the world. But you want to fight him over changing the name of some water?

No! i will not accept my downvotes, i stand by what i said. Its not important, you are directing your anger at the wrong target.

President of mexico is just showing themselves to be as big of a baby as trump. Best thing to do is ignore it. Its of such little importance.

Sorry, dude, i was making a joke. I appreciate that there are mitigations for this now, like anti fog lenses.

Ahh, yes! But try opening an oven!

I’m sparticus!

deleted by creator

Pornhub?

Yeah, and taylor swift is one of the best selling artists of all time. Almost selling as much the beatles or queen.

What’s your point?

I know this is off topic and not really that important but i can never stop myself from pointing this out about a commonly misused phrase.

Its not fuck sakes, because a fuck doesn’t sake

Its fuck’s sake, because the sake belongs to the fuck.

In fairness, i completely agree that the experts mentioned in the article are more than likely a reliable source of information here and their opinion is almost certainly the one i would side with, not being a biologist by any stretch of the imagination myself.

However, that’s not really my point. My point is that this person immediately, condescendingly and patronisingly disputed the claim of aomeone who at the very least sounded like they knew what they were talking about, without showing any evidence that they themselves are a reputable source of doubt and without knowing anything about the person they were disputing.

I dont think that’s a healthy way to discuss things.

I dont think i have given them any credit. I would argue i simply didn’t dispute them out of hand. Especially as you did without backing myself up with evidence of my own credentials.

I also thought i expressed that we should all be sceptical of anything we read on the internet. My issue was how you weighted your sceptisism. You seem to have automatically given all credibility to a reporter, under the assumption that they held no bias that affected the story they wrote.

For all you know, the random poster on the internet may be a legitimate scientist and expert who disagrees with them. Their opinion may be just as valid as the opinion in the report.

As a recent example, google released a quantum computer chip, and lemmy immediately ripped apart the reports and media buzz around what it was actually capable of. I believe that this is a great example of healthy sceptisism.

I believe that what you did is an example of unhealthy or misplaced sceptisism.

Granted, if it turned out that this random poster was absolutely unqualified to make the assertions that they did then absolutely you would be in the right.

I just dont think its helpful to dispute them out of hand with nothing to back you up.

You read what they wrote and became sceptical of their credentials? I mean, it’s healthy to be cautiously sceptical of anything you read/hear to an extent. But to immediately and without any further discussion, call them out in a patronising and condescending way is wild.

It makes me want to know if you have a background in biology. Since you so readily dispute someone else’s. Someone who, at least on the surface, seems to know what they are talking about.

In fact, why do you give so much credit to the legitimacy of the article and its writer, there might be a “38 strong group” of nobel laureates and experts warning about this, but the writer of the article adds the spin. The writer decides how to portray the warnings and their urgency. They might be overselling this. And since there is little to no citation in the article, i am more inclined to question the articles’ legitimacy before i query this poster…