Olives @olives@qoto.org

https://newsletter.devmoh.co/p/the-fall-of-stack-overflow-explained Stack Overflow can be a useful resource, but yeah, I would not sign up to it.

I always thought of it as a hostile environment (maybe, not in all the same ways as this article), and for what, some internet points? Better off just figuring out a problem yourself.

This is such a random idea, lol.

https://truthout.org/articles/psychiatric-incarceration-isnt-treatment-its-violence-survivors-say/ A cage described as "treatment" is still a cage.

If the problem is a lack of housing, and community programs, then surely that is a better (and more humane) avenue?

If you read the Eighth Amendment, it says:

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

Is this not cruel?

https://truthout.org/articles/cori-bush-introduces-bill-to-end-moral-catastrophe-of-solitary-confinement/ This bill seems reasonable enough. Solitary is quite inhumane.

https://apnews.com/article/libraries-books-bans-arkansas-758f28c04c573d03b869ad2738e2b06d Arkansas book ban law blocked by judge.

https://reason.com/2023/07/31/minnesota-caretaker-gets-lifetime-ban-for-crime-she-didnt-commit/ What do you think? Should someone be banned as a caretaker (for "adults with intellectual disabilities") for a crime she didn't commit?

Then again, the Dutch Government's instance also had some hiccups.

Presumably, Grammarly is a tool which acts as a spell checker / grammar checker, primarily for private content, so if they're going to get material to train against, they would necessarily have to invade someone's privacy??

Isn't that a huge invasion of privacy?

The BBC's instance doesn't even work properly.

I'm wary of the BBC here. I feel as if they're the sort of people who'd attack the fediverse, although there's no particular strong reason to defederate them either.

If Israel's Supreme Court striked the law stopping them from striking down bills which are unreasonable because it is unreasonable, that would be so ironic.

The OSB might get in the way of the BBC's "Mastodon experiment" (I hate this bill).

I have neither watched or thought a whole lot about this film.

I can think of how this *might* be useful, however, it's really not helpful for one guy to make this change unilaterally without any discussion.

In hindsight, and I suppose hindsight bias is a thing, people probably shouldn't have invested so much in centralized platforms like Twitter and Reddit.

Q is random and inexplicable, the rules he operates by are random and inexplicable, when he can't act, it is random and inexplicable. The writer makes it up as they go along.

There isn't any real system to how he operates, he is just there to play the role of this "higher and superior" being in random episodes.

That's what I kind of think. They probably could have fleshed his character out more, his system out more, but I guess that undermines being unfathomable.

I prefer Q the Star Trek character to Q the conspiracy theory, although tbh Q wasn't a very interesting character.

While a classic, I'm not fond of Monster. It's a bit boring (including the story tbh). I wouldn't buy it.

Also, Johan is basically just the stereotype of a psychopath, not really an interesting villain character imo.

Modern anime are usually better (although, there are enough anime in each season which are garbage).