Can I play? So let’s say a gentleman takes out his tallywacker and I’m inclined to give him a blow job, so I ask his permission. How does one properly blow on said tallywacker?

Using a private property for commercial use, and then saying it can’t be used for commercial use? I’d find that hard to believe.

Objects don’t have rights, people do. You can require your consent to be in a monetized video, but a house doesnt have consent to give haha. If you don’t want someone filming the inside of your property, don’t allow them in. Especially don’t ask them to pay you to come in.

Because it is creating a checks and balances for the president within the checks and balances of the current government. It would require such a constitutional change, it would require more actions than just a super majority as we believe it would.

Edit: sidebar. Each round of eliminations would present new questions, each candidate would submit. Some would be “illusion” of current or future events but were really past events. This prompting a past president or leader (Congress member, senator etc). To bring up and discuss what the false narrative was, showing what the realism had been. Then giving evaluation of how they responded at the time, and how it went right, wrong, and what could have gone better if done differently. Thus educating both the population and the candidates in doing so. Basically, the first reality TV program worth turning in for or watching brought to everyone via national TV/internet services for free… and using the ad segments to pay for the costs associated with the applicants. Doing away with campaign fees.

Side bar 2: Yes that means if you serve the nation as a president/ congressperson/ senator / or ambassador you may be called upon to serve your country for a lecture… But that should be fair, as we pay the secret service to protect you for life. A lecture twice after you retire won’t kill you. (Shit even Carter would have loved to do this 2 years ago because he wanted to believed in this country). And I would have called him to old… but with cards and his choosing, I would have been greatful to hear him give peanuts to pinenuts

I just wish those campaigning were required to provide policy ideas/plans for what they want to do, and where they want the money to come from. In an ideal world I would give the candidates 0 face time, possibly even no names to the public at first. (Would never work but would be interesting)

The options get a set of questions framed around current events, past events, and possible future events that they would give detailed responses to how they would have, would currently or would plan for those events. No party affiliations known. Eliminate contenders from the list by most accepted answers from the lists bringing it from say 50 candidates to 25, then 10, then 5, the 3 then 1. The election period is 6 months. No prior rallys, no posturing, no ads, and no names tied to the responses so no one cares about popularity.

The President is whomever wins 1st, Vice President 2nd, and 3rd place is placed on stand-by but works directly with both members to stay informed. If at any time a person makes decisions as president that the other 2 do not believe coorelate with the responses they gave to the people, they call an emergency vote to veto that directive, and recall a ranked choice vote where the population votes for all 3, where the 1st takes the presidency, 2nd VP, 3rd taking the back seat.

Would be fucking crazy, but at least itd be more fun than what we have now…

How many people did you vote for that weren’t Republican or Democrat in your local elections? If you didn’t vote for them (3rd party, new party) there, don’t expect them to ever exist as a presidential candidate. You can’t even qualify to be on the ballot if you don’t have the party established. You have to petition on all 50 states to be shown there and you will likely be denied on many.

If you don’t like the Republican or Democrat party, a solution would be to get local candidates to run under a new party that fits your views better, still you would NEED to vote for whichever of the 2 parties fits your views best in the presidential vote to SLOW the movement right/left/up/down whatever… And establish that party in enough city’s/counties/states to take seats that matter there. Once known… Then and only then would it be viable to split the vote, and you likely lose 4 years to a hard push into the directions you don’t want… While the final negotiations and realizations of merging or replacing/allying with the lesser evil party.

Likely meaning a pledge that you would hold primaries that would endorse each other if the winner of a primary shows more people. But you cannot and will not win a presidential election if you split the vote and don’t endorse each other

The evil is sowing doubt in people voting. Representatives fail to represent sometimes, or even often. But not voting just means they don’t represent you at all, and don’t care that you exist when they represent you.

If people didn’t show up and vote for their local officials, and state government officials… They have sabotaged their city/county/state/country.

All of these representatives start somewhere. If we don’t follow and support the local ones that are good, they never get a shot at being say a congresswoman who can break the majority of super majority and help move politics in whichever directions we want them.

(Cause guess where they come from if they aren’t politicians moving up… Either A. Rich or B. funded by the rich.)

It’s also true that you get backlashes normally if the system doesn’t get to far out of wack. FDR wasnt right of Hoover Coolridge and Harding. Sure one can argue overall we were shifting to the right… But we were NEVER going to be left of center so long as the U.S. existed, because the constitution is built on capitalism. Capitalism has a slow decay, can it be fixed? Maybe. Is it fixable now, maybe not. Could we have fixed it if we followed Carter with a closer to center President instead of Reagan, A LOT easier to have done it then… It took 60 years to get taxes on the rich to this point.

I’m not privileged, they just won’t attack me or my family yet. /s

Care to explain?

I think we need to make laws pertaining to the use and usage of the term by businesses. There is nothing intelligent about language models. Most of what AI is being used for in businesses is more “Automated Instructions” than anything intelligent.

Laws need to dictate that companies MUST have reasonable ability to get to a human representative and that they are legally responsible for their responses.

It’s fine to set up automated systems to assist people within companies, as the majority of issues people have can be solved through automated processes.

User: “I need access to this network share”

LLM: Okay submit this form: Link to network share access request form.

LLM: Can I further assist?

User submits form specifying what the network path location, radio buttons for read/ read, write permissions, and reason for needing access.

Form sends approve/deny button to owner of that specific network share in an email.

Approver clicks approve, and the user is added to the active directory group required, and receives an email back stating they have been added and they should log out and log back in so their active directory groups update group policies.

Time taken by users: 5 minutes Many companies have so many requests coming in that stuff like this often doesn’t get to the approving parties and completed for weeks.

But if you set up an LLM inside your company non external facing that locates forms and processes but cannot access user data or permissions it can take the workload of managing 60,000 users down by a significant amount.

(I’m sure there are a million other uses that could be legitimate, but that’s just a quick one off the top of my head)

I disagree with the decrease in discussion quality. Votes inherently create echo chambers. We have low effort conversations where we all downvote someone whose opinion is different and it makes them feel whatever kind of way, and they act accordingly. Whether it be leave, lash out, or discuss. If it wasn’t built in and someone wouldn’t already know I would say it is a bad idea, but since it will exist, making it so people learn to be civil is probably best.

It is information provided to the instance runners, mods, and other fedeverse platforms such as mastodon. It inherently tracks such to know if a user has previously liked/up voted an entry.

So you may have a conversation on here, and some users will know who is downvoting, some will only know who’s upcoming, and some will know none

Who declared war via a social media platform? That sounds like horrible military strategy