I did watch the video. Half of it is blaming the PirateSoftware video for tanking the entire campaign. Ross literally blamed one guy for the failure. That’s cope.

Lol what a bunch of cope. One guy made a youtube video and that’s the only reason why world governments aren’t changing laws? The video has less views than his Inscryption playthrough. Is he the sole reason for Inscryption’s success too? Is Thor actually a god who can make things happen just by leveraging the power of his 2 million subscribers!?

This failed because the average person does not care about “saving video games”. Nintendo announced they can revoke your access to play games you paid $80 for on the Switch 2 and it’s setting sales records.

From the wiki page on the American Bar Association, they seem to mostly be involved in setting academic and ethical standards and don’t actually grant or revoke licences.

They’re owned by private equity firm CVC Capital Partners. It’s just their way of saying they’re gutting the staff to increase profits for shareholders.

In 2006, CVC and Permira were accused by Labour MP Gwyn Prosser in the House of Commons of “greed” and “blatant asset stripping” of The AA “to borrow £500m on the basis of The AA’s assets in order to pay themselves a dividend.”

You know it’s bad when even the French think you’ve crossed the line.

Games journalism constantly amazes me. Here’s the article:

“GamesRadar recently published an amazing mega interview with devs from dozens of studios. Here’s a quote from it. It’s the same one we put in the headline so now you’ve read it twice. I recommend you checkout the rest of the interview.”

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/sexual-health/abortion-canada.html

Abortion became legal in Canada through the Criminal Law Amendment Act, passed in 1969. At that time, abortions could take place in hospitals, but only if a 3-doctor committee determined that the pregnancy posed a danger to the parent’s health. In 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the Criminal Code provisions restricting abortion were unconstitutional and struck them down.

Abortion was legal with restrictions. The Supreme Court only removed the restrictions.

SCOTUS has been effectively making laws for a while. Interracial marriage is legal because of a SCOTUS ruling. Gay marriage is legal because of a SCOTUS ruling. Abortion was legal because of a SCOTUS ruling.

These are all legal in Canada because parliament passed laws making them legal, and not because of Supreme Court rulings. I get the sense that the US Congress is so bad at passing any laws whatsoever that the only time laws change is when SCOTUS changes them.

These are all great questions for a lawyer and the answer is probably “it depends”. My understanding is that, if something has multiple licences, you need to follow all of them simultaneously. You can’t choose unless it’s clear that the author allows the choice by using “or” when listing the licences.

The best thing to do when something isn’t clearly licenced is to reach out to the author and ask them to clarify it. If they don’t write back then you shouldn’t do anything with the source material.

Yup. Trump also removed the requirement limiting the amount of water a toilet can use to flush and no manufacturers cared. They already changed their designs and factories to produce efficient models. Why would they change it all just to make stuff that’s worse?

tl;dw

And then the article:

“The poll shows 1 in 3 Americans support continuing to send random brown people to a gulag in El Salvador on the off chance it lowers grocery prices.”

Definitely! But as another comment said, there’s no guarantee a teacher will actually reframe the problem into something interesting. They can just give you work sheets and have you do them over and over and over. Math then becomes a topic that relies heavily on the teacher’s ability to engage with students compared to other subjects.

I think it’s a topic that just doesn’t interests most people, especially children. Where I live, solving problems like 10 - x = 4, solve for x is taught to 10 year olds in grade 5. How many 10 year olds would think this is interesting?

In comparison, grade 5 science teaches cells are the building block of life, energy can exist in forms like electrical and light and can transform between them, and matter has states like solid, liquid, and gas. It’s stuff that ends up being naturally more interesting.

I ordered a margarita pizza! Where’s the margarita!? You’re fired!

It could hallucinate a citation that never even existed as a fictional case

That’s what happened in this case reviewed by Legal Eagle.

The lawyer provided a brief that cited cases that the judge could not find. The judge requested paper copies of the cases and that’s when the lawyer handed over some dubious documents. The judge then called the lawyer into the court to ask why he submitted fraudulent cases and why he shouldn’t have his law licence revoked. The lawyer fessed up that he asked ChatGPT to write the brief and didn’t check the citations. When the judge asked for the cases, the lawyer went back to ask ChatGPT for them, and it generated the cases…but they were clearly not real. So much so that the defendants names would change throughout the case, the judges who ruled on the cases were from different districts, and they were all about a page long when real case rulings tend to be dozens of pages.

My guess is to maintain plausible disability. A foreign government assisting you win an election isn’t illegal if you aren’t aware of it. It becomes illegal when you know it’s happening and do nothing to stop it.

Depends on the type of contempt charge. Legal Eagle compares the types in a video on this case.

tl;dw

• Civil Contempt (coercive) - incremental fines or jail time until the charged follows an order.
• Civil Contempt (compensatory) - a fine paid to someone who was wronged by ignoring a court order
• Criminal Contempt (direct) - jail time meant as punishment for directly disobeying a judge while court is in session
• Criminal Contempt (indirect) - jail time meant as punishment for disobeying a judge while court isn’t in session.

Criminal contempt can be pardoned and Trump has pardoned it before. Civil contempt cannot be pardoned but it only lasts until an order is followed.

Enforcing a contempt ruling is the next issue. Normally a US marshal would enforce it but they technically answer to the Attorney General, who answers to Trump, who could order them not to listen to the judge or be fired. A court could theoretically deputize someone to enforce the order directly, but that has never happened and people could just not recognize the authority of the deputized officer.

I really hate how this is the global wedge issue. It worked with Trump in the US and now PP is using it in Canada. Neither of them care about Gaza, nor do their supporters. However, the supporters of their opponents do care. So they keep pressing their opponents to make half hearted statements about the issue in the hopes that it causes their supporters to just not vote for anyone.

CSIS has confirmed Modi has interfered in Canadian elections as well as sent an assassin to kill his critic inside of Canada.