True. Problem is: how do you respond to someone that use a nuke ? If Russia use a nuke, it is the end either way: if other retaliate the situation escalates, if they do not retaliate Russia think they have free hand.
During the cold war the only thing that prevented a nuclear escalation is the certainty of mutual destruction, nothing else.
Technically is called “warning shot”…
I agree, they would not start. But if Russia start, they surely will retaliate: a nuke in the baltic states or even nearer will cause harm also to them. And France has a strange nuclear doctrine.
You mean the same France, Uk and USA had ?
Putin is not stupid enough to not understand that if he ever try to use a nuke he will be the first target of the retaliation.
Was not yet finished. And, aside him being alive at the end, every concession to Russia is a win for him, And to pull the trick again sometime in the future.
Simply because he has no problem to send millions of people as cannon fodder against EU, like he is doing in Ukraine.
And in his mind, as long as he is alive, he win. Never mind if his country is destroyed.
I would say that it is more like a software company putting in their TOS that you cannot use their software to do a specific thing(s).
Would be correct to sue the software company because a user violated the TOS ?
I agree that what happened is tragic and that the answer by OpenAI is beyond stupid but in the end they are suing the owner of a technology for a uses misuse of said technology. Or should we sue also Wikipedia because someone looked up how to hang himself ?
That’s like a gun company claiming using their weapons for robbery is a violation of terms of service.
The gun company can rightfully say that what you do with your property is not their problem.
But let’s make a less controversial example: do you think you can sue a fishing rods company because I use one of their rods to whip you ?
but that with the files, Trump and his policies could have been prevented.
I am not sure that with the files released Trump would have not won.
Tonight alone, I created dozens of JSON files using an LLM for a game mod I’m developing that would have taken me days if I had created them manually.
You don’t need AI to do this, just a few dozen lines of Python…
Well, if the workers are paid for 60 hours a week and it is for a short period of time, I don’t see any difference with any other rush (Christmas, sales) that other workers face.
Just wait until Trump throws a tantrum and European pussy lawmakers forgive everything and then change the laws to allow this.
Don’t worry, we Italians have proved times and again that we can be a little too slow to follow EU regulations…
I am missing the connection between “release the files” and “make better politics”, especially because Kamala Harris was already in a position where she could have done something (she was Biden’s vice, let’s not forget it).
What make you think that after 4 years as Vice president, doing basically nothing and being aknowleged as the worst one, she would have been better as President ? Just because she could have released the Epstein’s files ? Do you relly thing that there are only Republican’s names in these files ?
Yeah, and while driving a car, with a beetle parked on the side, all you can see is the head and not much more.
They can’t see if there is a cyclist or if someone wants to cross at the intersection. And that is one cause of all those deadly accidents while turning.
To a car on the street, even a smaller car parked where it should not be is a problem. Most cars (every type) are generally higher than a pedestrian and if not higher you see only the head of the pedestrian or nothing much more. There is a reason you cannot (by roads law) park too near to crossroad, and the rules is way older than the first SUV’s.
What it is true is that it is said that a higher front of a car is more dangerous to the pedestrian but I really don’t understand the reason: being it by a 1.5/2.0 tons car is devastating anyway. I don’t belive that being able to roll over the car (and land where and how ?) is really better and a lower car’s front could end with the pedestrian head to hit violently the car hood and/or windshield.
Kamala was not worse for billionaires.
Maybe. But she was certainly worse than any other possible candidate the Democrats could have choosen. I mean, she was the worst vice-president in history (if the polls were right), got less than 1000 votes in the party’s primaries elections and was embarassing during the TV debetes. How the Democrats thought she could win ? Just because she is a black woman ? It seems too little.
They could have published the Epstein stuff and Trump would have been silenced. Publishing the dirt now stresses that Trump was wanted. Either there is no Russian influence or it does not matter.
Yeah, and to a person that has no work and now work perspective the release of the Epstein help how ?
Don’t get me wrong, what Epstein did was awful and every accomplice should be punished but it was not the biggest problem people had/have.
I said the other side, not between the Republicans.
Now, obviously Republicans could have pushed for another better candidate, like the Democrats could have done, but the point is that they had to choose between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris and we know the result.
As I said elsewhere, this time it is not that the Republicans did everything right, but the Democrats did everything wrong, starting with who they choose (which, by the way, got less than 1000 votes in the party primaries for example).
Why was there no big rebellion by the patriotic billionaires? How could he be reelected if the people in power knew that he was colluding with Russia?
In this specifica instance, probably because the other side was way worse.
Those who refuse to learn from history… you know the rest.
You make the bold assumption that Trump and his men studied history.
Which, by chance, is not present in every country where the politicians care (or at least pretend to) for their people.
Could be not be that people is tired to vote the same people who always make promises and then deliver the opposite ?
True, but probably they are more than the ones EU can send.
From a pure logical point of view you are right, but in reality there is nothing that prevent him to do it. Which do not imply that he can win obviously, he just need to be able to go on longer than EU.