Interesting article. Disappointing to see that it’s likely Yasuke’s role in history was greatly embellished just to sell books to the Western world. And disappointing to see that Ubisoft didn’t do their due diligence in researching him.

That being said, the game is a blast to play. Historical inaccuracies aside, I’d say it’s the best entry in the Assassin’s Creed series since Black Flag, which was also fraught with historical inaccuracies.

It’s okay. I’ve never said “I love you” to your sister, either.

Does it matter? If you could quantify your lost potential, would such knowledge benefit you in any way? I understand the drive to understand your major life mistakes as deeply as possible, but you’ve already made great strides to learn from and correct said mistakes. You seem to be on a pretty strong upward trajectory, but if you obsess over what’s lost, it just might drag you back down.

It’s saying that copyright law doesn’t apply to AI training, because none of the data is copied. It’s more akin to a person reading an impossible amount at an impossible speed, then using what they read as inspiration for their own writing. Sure, you could ask an LLM trained on, say, Edgar Allen Poe’s works to recite the entirety of The Raven, but it can only “recall” similarly to a human, and will have just as many mistakes (probably more, really) in its recitation as a human would.

Spoken like someone who either didn’t read the article or has a deep misunderstanding of what AI training is.

Any fan (or hater) of punk will tell you:

“Nice punk music” is an oxymoron.

You’re missing the point. It’s likely that he never held those views to begin with. He was just a kid doing and saying what he could to get reactions from people. Clearly it worked, 'cause we’re still talking about it.

A tangent, if I may: it’s important that entertainers be allowed to joke about things society deems offensive. It allows us to process such ostensibly offensive content in safe environments, to shine a light on the absurdity of such negative ideas. We laugh at nazi jokes not because we agree with naziism, but because they’re so wildly divorced from reality and our own views as to be absurd to even consider.

So much Elden Ring. I already Platinum’d it on PS5 at launch, but I recently saw that there’s a surprisingly big and active modding community for it, so I got it on Steam and installed the Elden Ring Reforged mod. It’s been long enough since I played and the mod changes enough that it feels like a new game. It’s incredible.

At least it’ll be easy to boycott this shitty company; they may have a stranglehold on some great IPs, but corporate greed has killed their ability to make good games.

If a miracle happens and they accidentally shit out something worthwhile, I’ll find a copy sailing the seven seas, then donate directly to the dev teams. WB is not getting any more of my money.

Or a super-duperlative.

There’s a distressing trend of people (self-identifying “progressives”, for the most part) abandoning family because of ideological differences, so most here will probably tell you to cut contact.

I don’t know you or your father, but as a dad myself, I can tell you that if he has the slightest decency as a parent, he’ll be willing to listen if you come from a place of love and respect. Tell him how you’re personally affected by his actions. Appeal to his paternal instinct. At best, you could convince him to rethink his ideology. If that fails, you can hopefully get him to agree to avoid discussing politics with you.

It’s especially important now, with a nationwide financial collapse looming, for family to stick together.

Yes, that’s normally a good rule to follow, since “whom” is for a sentence’s object, but this is a special case. The clause in question is either a salutation that has no subject or object, and so either “whoever” or “whomever” is correct, or it’s a subject clause (a noun phrase, really) with an unnecessary, stylized “to” for the sake of comedic impact, in which case “whoever” would be correct.

FYI, your post title should use “whoever”, not “whomever”.

A good trick to tell whether to use “who” or “whom” is to replace “whom” with “him” or “who” with “he”. It’ll be immediately obvious (to a native English speaker) which is correct.

Whomever invented LED bus advertisements becomes Him invented LED bus advertisements

Vs

Whoever invented some stupid shit becomes He invented some stupid shit

Those suppressing the discussions about the suppression of discussions have been suppressed.

No, see y’all’ve got it backwards. It’s the Gulf of America, not the Gulf of the United States of America. He’s making it more inclusive!

/s

You’d think that, but really, I suspect a lot of the confusion comes from the word itself. “Intersex” implies with its “inter-” prefix that something exists between the two sexes, thus implying the existence of a third (or more) sex.

But again, it’s just a blanket term that covers a wide variety of medical conditions related to development of sex organs/characteristics.

And I shouldn’t have to say this, but of course I’m not saying that one’s anatomy has any influence on one’s worth as a person. I’m not a monster. I’m just a stickler for semantic accuracy.

Nobody said that. Nobody would say that. Be reasonable.

If you’re actually interested in understanding what I’m saying, this article does a good job of explaining it in lay-friendly terms.

Yep. Nothing wrong with it. Everybody’s abnormal in some way. Doesn’t mean we should redefine scientific terms or “other” someone just because their abnormality has to do with sex characteristics.

Personally, I go out of my way to not be normal, but most people want to fit in, and especially don’t want to be seen as different or lesser because of something they can’t control.

Male and female are the only sexes; intersex is just a blanket term for various medical conditions that describe abnormal development of sex characteristics.

The article title is misleading. It’s true that there are only two sexes, but Trump’s order is concerning gender, which is a spectrum.