The government assumes we're all criminals or spies. And we the public shouldn't have access to information for issues of officer safety and national security. It's why agents are masked now and often don't even display a badge number. Yet if I blast a guy toting a gun and breaking into my property that refuses to identify himself, then I'm the bad guy. Somewhere along the line we all forgot who the government actually works for: the People.

Just publicly release Flock data for all your officers.We should only accept a surveillance state if it is completely transparent.

No, I don't think that's it.

There is a vast world out there beyond US politics that doesn't operate with the profit motive being dominate in academic and medical research.

Papers get ridiculed when the data is not reproducible or does not support the claims. Not because the medical industry can't make huge profits sell baking soda. Papers are written and published because that's how you get ahead in academics. If there is a simple miracle cure for cancer, there are a thousand hungry PhDs and students willing to write papers on it.

As a child I wrote a BASIC program that can always tie at tic-tac-toe. Not every situation is winnable.

"Now all restaurants are Taco Bell"

Nope!
+++ATH0

Systemd could manage your LLMs like Ollama, because I genuinely don't know where the line is with systemd.

Until systemd decides otherwise.

The bi-partisan Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (of 1968) explicitly prohibit Iran from ever developing or possessing nuclear weapons. And 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) reaffirmed that Iran was not to develop a path to nuclear weapons. And included dismantling of many centrifuges, and divestment of nearly all of their enriched uranium stockpile, and submit to 24/7 indepedent monitoring and reasserts the authority of the IAEA to resume inspections. The sunset provision allowed some enrichment to continue for peaceful energy purposes, with the caveat that inspections and monitoring remains in place.

Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush green lit selling third-party weapons to Sadam. And David Perdue ( American Ambassador to China ) confirms that President Trump asked President Xi Jinping if China would like to buy weapons from the US. In 2003, while G.W. Bush was in office, the IAEA documented that Iran was found in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards obligations. So, I suspect the track record for the GOP is far worse than Dems when it comes to arming our adversaries, just on these facts.

Periodic expansions and contractions are a persistent feature of capitalist economies. And the US and much of the world are ran by the idea that bigger is better: bigger boom, bigger bust. It does maximize the profits for those who are well-positioned and protected. And the the dot Com and other bust cycles drained away my parent's retirement, like so many others.

Gen X are the new boomers. We have most of their flaws and outlook. At times we seem to have more self awareness, but at others we are overconfident in that awareness and look like fools.

Rather than focus on generalizations based on generation, I prefer to divide people up between people mature enough to adapt to observed reality and people who deny reality. Either can cry or get angry when the world doesn't work the way they think it should, either for themselves or for others.

This one belongs in the trash though.

Cool. I'm glad people are aware of and catch measurement errors so quickly. It's almost like there are multiple independent sources and when a temperature seems to be out of what is expected from a weather model and heat map, it's worth investigating.

As for weather station standards because the source of false measurements used for the basis of the global warming hypothesis, if that is your argument. I would say you need substantial evidence that there is a relationship between a few known faulty weather stations out of many thousands of weather stations operating in the world.

A a hypothetical pattern of lying is a very weak argument. I would abandon it. Attack the argument and not the person. What logical reasons do you have, if any. What premises do you reject and why. Just basic courtesy when trying to have a rational discussion.

Some scientists nailed predicting the frequency and amount of record breaking temperatures. Out of 17 climate model projections published from 1970 to 2007: 10 closely matched observations and 14 matched after accounting for differences in atmospheric conditions.
Patterns like high and low temperature cycles are something a statistical model is good at predicting.
P.S. I hope it doesn't come as a shock to you that there are multiple climate models.

Great. Nobody asked for this.