A Sinister Wizard

You know what that means

What

Do you mean to make like, gay posts

FIRST TRUE COLOR PHOTO OF AN ATOMIC NUCLEUS!

FIJMU News 10-19-21

Today, the world's most powerful microscope has photographed in real color the core of a single atom. The nucleus of an atom is like the delicious yolk of a hard boiled quantum egg, containing protons and neutrons (red) as held together by gluons (tan filaments). All known substances are made of atoms with nuclei like the one seen above.

The atom used was a Thulium atom because of its highly photogenic traits, bright coloration, and nice atomic number. According to microscopy professor Minnie Lewker, "Atoms have been photographed before but never in real color. They usually look almost like waves of light and dark instead of real, tangible objects as they are."

The same microscope team was also able to take the first known photograph of an electron:

This is a form of backdoor bigotry from both normative facts (there are more straight than gay relationships) and well represented bigoted beliefs (men are superior to women).

it would be so awesome

1. The court holds Google responsible for statements made by its AI, considering them Google's statements (search engines have limited liability for results in their engine as they're the words of other sites/companies/people), meaning when their AI lies/hallucinates they're liable for the defamation/harm resulting from those statements.

2. Google's defense that customers are generally aware of the lack of reliability and are responsible for fact checking was dismissed. As the court pointed out, that would "significantly diminish" AI Search's stated purpose and it can't be distinguished from Google's business practices/statements as a search tool.

3. Studies have found about 91% of Google's everyday AI responses are accurate, leaving millions of searches per HOUR with potential liability for falsehoods. 56% of correct responses weren't supported by the sources the AI listed. Both of which mean Google is now liable for a LOT more AI "errors."

4. Google was held liable for 80% of court costs in this case and this precedent is expected to reverberate around the world. This is a massive shift from the 3rd-party search provider role Google has previously played and it comes right as they've tied ALL searches to their AI search.

For the past 200 years, there have been significantly more people being born than dying. People have naturally accepted this as the status quo because it's been happening for 10+ generations, but in the grand scheme of things it is abnormal. At some point the birth rate is going to go back to replacement level and the population is going to level off because infinite growth isn't sustainable.

Yes there are going to be some practical issues with an aging population as that transition occurs, but that is inevitable and far more easy to deal with than trying to artificially prop up birth rates.

In that framework, a "good person" committing a good action or a "bad person" committing a bad action are not seen as moral actions that affect one's opinion of the person; they are simply seen as the person acting in accord with their supposed moral nature. On the other hand, a "good person" committing a bad action or a "bad person" committing a good action are seen as moral actions and do affect one's opinion of that person, because they are acting against their supposed moral nature. So in a twisted way, "good people" are only given credit for their bad actions and "bad people" are only given credit for their good actions.