I guess if I have to explain the joke, I have no one to blame but myself. <sigh>

The redhead in armor is Chappell Roan at this year’s VMAs, and the blonde is Sabrina Carpenter from a performance on SNL. The original photo in the post was making fun of noticing the superficial resemblance of a shot from Buffy the Vampire Slayer to those two looks.

Damn it’s weird being old enough to have been a fan of Buffy, but still knowing and liking new pop music.

Willow (Alyson Hannigan) and Buffy (Sarah Michelle Gellar) from Buffy the Vampire Slayer

For those confused:

It is if you’re old enough to know who the pic is actually of, or young enough to know who Chappell Roan and Sabrina Carpenter actually are?

You weren’t wrong - title is clickbait-y as hell.

I don’t think anyone has been inviting her to the cookout for awhile…

This shows so many gross misconceptions and with such utter conviction, I’m not even sure where to start. And as you seem to have decided you like to get free stuff that is the result of AI trained off the work of others without them receiving any compensation, nothing I say will likely change your opinion because you have an emotional stake in not acknowledging the problems of AI.

I inherited brain structures that are natural language processors. As well as the ability to understand and repeat any language sounds. Over time, my brain focused in on only the language sounds I heard the most and through trial and repetition learned how to understand and make those sounds.

AI - as it currently exists - is essentially a babbling infant with none of the structures necessary to do anything more than repeat sounds back without understanding any of them. Anyone who tells you different is selling you something.

Hopefully not too pedantic, but no one is “teaching” AI anything. They’re just feeding it data in the hopes that it can learn probabilities for certain types of output. It “understands” neither the Reddit post nor the scientific paper.

<waves at likely a fellow genealogist!> :)

Actually in most places it was however the person wished to be listed and often included full first names and sometimes middle initials. Or could sometimes be a couple like “John and Mary Doe”

This _ might_ be the dumbest take I’ve ever seen. Clearly someone made up their mind to hate Valve and everything they see just confirms their existing biases, reality be dammed.

Harris has talked repeatedly about her work taking down sex traffickers. Usually within the context of her work against transnational gangs.

“I went after transnational gangs, drug cartels and human traffickers that came into our country illegally. I prosecuted them in case after case,” she said at a campaign rally in Nevada

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/17/kamala-harris-immigration-border-gangs-00173819

But also within context of protecting sex workers.

In one of her first acts as an elected official, Harris sponsored a bill signed into law by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that increased penalties for adults who solicited sex from minors and was considered revolutionary for its push to transform children from criminals into victims.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-09-26/before-combating-sex-trafficking-became-a-republican-tenet-kamala-harris-wrote-the-playbook

You know, I think a good rule of thumb is if someone finds humiliation “funny”, they’re generally kind of an asshole. Even if everyone is in on the “joke”, it’s revealing of a certain kind of mindset.

It’s more the fact they were running a mole in the CIA. If you want an example of more direct action, how does this one work for you (from just this week):

https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2024/09/25/chinas_salt_typhoon_cyber_spies/

In a related security advisory, government agencies accused the Flax Typhoon crew of amassing a SQL database containing details of 1.2 million records on compromised and hijacked devices that they had either previously used or were currently using for the botnet

Back in February, the US government confirmed that this same Chinese crew comprised"multiple" US critical infrastructure orgs’ IT networks in America in preparation for “disruptive or destructive cyberattacks” against those targets.

I mean, the subject of “Chinese Espionage in the United States” has a fairly lengthy page all of its own on Wikipedia with examples and concerns. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_espionage_in_the_United_States

Probably one of the most notable examples:

Between 2010 and 2012, intelligence breaches led to Chinese authorities dismantling CIA intelligence networks in the country, killing and arresting a large number of CIA assets within China.[43] A joint CIA/FBI counterintelligence operation, codenamed “Honey Bear”, was unable to definitively determine the source of the compromises, though theories include the existence of a mole, cyber-espionage, compromise of Hillary Clinton’s illicit classified email server as noted by the intelligence community inspector general,[44] or poor tradecraft.[43]Mark Kelton, then the deputy director of the National Clandestine Service for Counterintelligence, was initially skeptical that a mole was to blame.[43]

In January 2018, a former CIA officer named Jerry Chun Shing Lee[note 1] was arrested at John F. Kennedy International Airport, on suspicion of helping dismantle the CIA’s network of informants in China.[47][48]

And that’s just one we all know about. Not to mention a rich history of Chinese state-sponsored corporate espionage and a history of let’s say playing fast and loose with international norms, human rights, etc.

But that’s the whole point - the source linked in the original post is deemed to be reliable by their own determined tool. So why is a mod nitpicking the text within the linked article? It’s either a reputable source or not. They kept stuff from the New York Times about the Oct 6 attacks even though that didn’t have good sources, and they throw out anything from Fox News even if it’s factually correct.

The mod made a mistake and didn’t seem to realize that the Ukrainian Pravda (legit, privately owner, reliable) is different from Russian Pravda (owned by Russian Communist Party, propaganda) - and keeps coming up with excuses why he did what he did. It’s sad

Now you’re just being intentionally obtuse:

Official Ministry of Defence page with the same numbers:

https://www.mil.gov.ua/en/news/2024/09/24/the-estimated-combat-losses-of-russians-over-the-last-day-1400-persons-61-artillery-systems-3-anti-aircraft-systems/

“Data are being updated.”

Obviously a rough English translation and more precisely should probably be “Data subject to change” or “Data continues to be collected”.

Just like any military stats are reported across the world.

That’s why they should be falling back on the reputable sources as shown by their own MBFC bot instead of playing backseat journalist and questioning individual sources within an article.

Dude, really? Did you not see the links I provided from the official Ministry of Defense site or the verified Facebook account? The other news sites providing the same information?

At this point you seem to only be arguing in bad faith because you don’t want to admit you couldn’t tell the difference between Russian Pravda and the Ukrainian Pravda. That was the only thing mentioned in your comment on the removed post, and everything since then has seemingly been posturing.

This is so disappointing - I’ve been a vocal proponent of the job you mods are doing and supportive of your efforts to use what tools you have to help with a difficult job, and you’re just being completely unreasonable about this.