Mnemnosyne

That doesn't make him not a geezer, it just means she looks young.

I did think the 'a young candidate!' stuff was so bloody stupid when she became the pick. She is going to be 60 in October, the only metric by which she is young is compared to Biden and Trump.

Not to say I have a problem with her or anything, but a young candidate she is not.

I'm unclear as to whether you're saying this is a positive or negative.

I see it as a positive - it means they have a price and that price is the same for everyone without favoritism.

Because so-called second amendment advocates are really just gun nuts, and so over the years they have worked hard to maintain the right to keep and bear guns, rather than arms.

Thus knives, swords, halberds, maces, and all other 'arms' have had restrictions go unchallenged, or at least, not challenged by an extensive and well funded network of advocacy.

Well I think it can be fixed with technology because fixing it doesn't violate any laws of physics.

A more pressing question however is whether we humans will obtain or develop the necessary technology and put enough resources into using it, soon enough to make a difference to us. And on that question my magic 8-ball says "Outlook not so good."

It's not implying he can't be bothered, but that the machine can do a better job.

...which may be true, depending on just how bad he is at writing. Like, I was just watching this classic the other day. If this guy writes like some of those people, the machine may infact be better.

That said, for most people it's stupid, and the tech isn't able to do a better job at expressing such things.

Yet.

Thank you, I understand better now. So in theory, if one of the other search engines chose to not have their crawler identify itself, it would be more difficult for them to be blocked.

I'm kind of curious to understand how they're blocking other search engines. I was under the impression that search engines just viewed the same pages we do to search through, and the only way to 'hide' things from them was to not have them publicly available. Is this something that other search engines could choose to circumvent if they decided to?

That first edition version looks like a dog's head with horns and pointy ears to me at least, and that's kinda what I was referring to.

Admittedly the 2nd edition version looks a bit less doglike, but I still see similarities with some breeds.

It's not a mistranslation that caused it, kobolds were both described and illustrated as doglike until 3rd Edition where with no explanation they simply changed it and decided they were lizard like/draconic.

I do think the new version of kobolds is an interesting creature, but truthfully they should've just come up with a new name for this new creature instead of just completely changing the kobold.

We could start with holding police officers responsible. It's great that they charged this one, but why aren't the other police there being charged as accomplices since they took no action to prevent the shooting?

So here's a few simple starter thoughts.

1. Establish an external agency with the mandate of prosecuting police. They have their own prosecutorial system, their own investigators, their own prosecutors, their own courts and their own judges, completely unconnected to the prosecutorial system the police work with. You cannot have the same people that work together one day and rely on each other be the ones to investigate each other, it doesn't work. Not even a separate 'internal affairs division' is enough.

2. Any police officer who discharges their weapon, for any reason, is immediately suspended, and any pay is withheld until an investigation for why the weapon was discharged is completed. The investigation of course is conducted by that external agency.

3. If a police officer discharging a weapon causes injury or death, all police officers on the scene are suspended and their pay withheld until the investigation is over.

4. If the police officer who discharged their weapon is charged with assault, murder, whatever, then all other officers at the scene are charged as accomplices, unless they took proactive action to prevent the first officer from committing their illegal action. Think of it like felony murder - if you and a group of friends are committing a crime and someone is murdered, you are all prosecutable under felony murder even if you had no direct hand in the murder at all.

That's probably a good start, it may not solve all the problems, but it'd be a lot better than what's being done now, which is very, very little. I'd say an even better thing to do in addition would be to have every current police officer purged and never work in law enforcement again. All police organizations kinda need a clean slate with fresh people and no organizational momentum and culture carryover from how it's happening now, because a lot of what needs to change is organizational culture, and just altering the rules is more difficult than rebuilding a completely new organizational culture from the ground up.

That means prices are coming way down, right? I mean, we've been told that's how it works in capitalism, right? High supply means prices go down, so we'll be having bargain sale prices for homes pretty soon!

Surely capitalism wouldn't lie to us...right?

Better to acknowledge it in a response. I prefer to do that myself if I'm wrong or something of that nature, post a reply acknowledging instead of trying to cover up that I was ever wrong in the first place.