jwt

It is mentioned in this article.

Like Zoidberg for moar anchovies.

... would split the party (possibly irreparably)

Especially since it's a near certainty that Trump would just continue his presidential bid (as a write-in independent if need be).

For me, if a company fails to make a clear cut case about why a product of theirs needs AI, I'm gonna assume they just want to misuse AI to cheaply deliver a mediocre product instead of putting in the necessary cost of manhours.

I'd think so too, but (I assume) you and I don't have a small army of lawyers and lobbyists on retainer.

I think the question is not if it's solvable, but 'who pays for it?' and 'who can be held accountable if things go awry?'

Or Jathon (pronounced like Mike Tyson would pronounce JSON)

Yes, those levitating shits are really eye opening.

Ik kan zo'n maatregel wel begrijpen als dergelijke items keer op keer een bak niet te filteren bagger opleveren.

Nujij heeft geen verplichting om als spreekbuis van mensen te fungeren. Ik merk dat mensen 'het vrije woord' naast: 'ik mag zeggen wat ik wil' vaak breder trekken tot: 'en iedereen moet luisteren naar wat ik te zeggen heb' of 'en anderen moeten er voor zorgen dat ik te horen ben', en die laatste twee vallen mijns inziens niet onder het vrije woord.

Generally speaking you vote for someone. I'm thinking they meant literally a box on the ballot:
☑️ Against trump

I'm so thankful I live in a country where 4 months is (still) believed to be a ridiculously long amount of time to campaign.

Good luck America! Please show the rest of the world you're still capable of making sane choices.

So we just invert the logic now, right?
Make the captcha impossibly hard to get right for humans but doable for bots, and let people in if they fail the test.