Alue42

joined 3 months ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As someone else mentioned, you probably hit snooze without realizing it while still mostly asleep. Snooze is 9 minutes. On this clock, the "snooze button" is literally the entire face of the clock. When the noise initially went off, if you rolled over and tapped the clock it would have reset the alarm.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I have this exact same clock. Are you positive it's not going off? You may have it set to be quiet in the beginning and ramp up to being loud over 15-30 minutes which is supposed to wake you up gradually. So perhaps you only noticed it going off at 10:46.

For instance, I want to be awake at 7, so I set mine for 6:30 with a 30min gradual wake up (sounds and light gradually go up for 30 min).

That setting is not required and you can have it just wake you up, but then it defeats the point of a sunlight alarm in my opinion.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There was a big push a few months ago, a year ago, who knows, Internet time is weird, when McDonald's updated their terms of service on their app and added a clause like this. There were a lot of posts on social media, Reddit, fedi, etc to make sure people didn't agree to the new terms or download the app if they never had it.

There are people that pay attention to it, and even research papers done on it. A lot of the common apps started doing it at the same time. Venmo has it, Pinterest, Facebook, etc. things you wouldn't think of that would have cases like this. But certain ones stick out because of the seemingly more real world complications (I mean, venmo could have fraud, Facebook could have cyber bullying, etc), but McDonald's could have health issues, Disney clearly this is the case.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As soon as I read the title to this, I thought "here we go again", but I'm amazed there are actual helpful comments and only one reference to the arms broken/mom bit

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The original idea of being a sovereign citizen is fine in and off itself - something like Sealand - claiming Nation status outside the jurisdictional claim of any other nation and developing your own laws and methods for citizenship. If you can get your nation to be recognized by another and you are able to sustain yourself (electric, water, safety, roads, etc). This has happened in a few places. It's just something eccentric people that have some method of getting some isolated land do, or that they want to not be bothered.

But they still recognized the laws of the other places they were traveling to while they were there, because they obviously couldn't stay only within that tiny little area forever. However, people started to claim sovereign citizenry within their respective countries and that specific laws didn't apply to them because they were sovereign. Which is just ridiculous even if they were members of one of these sovereign nations.

Since none of what they were saying ever seemed to work, they started coming up with these specific "phrases" that had to be used and ways of saying it, capitalization, punctuation, etc. but the most insane to recently come out is that they believe the government sets up a secret Treasury account at birth in the name of anyone with a birth certificate that the government uses and puts debts onto (that's why they don't want to have birth certificates) but that they can get the debts cleared and get any access to the money in the account by using specific phrases to a judge. The account is the capitalized name on the birth certificate and the actual human is the lower case name. That's where a lot of these posted letters stem from.

My hope is that if they are trying to purge themselves from existence in databases, they also are removing themselves from the voter rolls - because if they truly believe they are a non-us citizen, then they should have no say in the state of the country, or even the local elections, correct?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Exactly! If I am calling customer support, it's because I have exhausted all other options of finding a solution to my issue, and I have a feeling I'm searching more extensively than the options that this AI is being fed. If I've reached the point of calling, I need someone that can think of a creative solution.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Here's a taste of the GOP view:

I used to be a government employee in the state of Florida (when Rick Scott was governor) as an environmental educator. One day, we received a memo that for all government employees the phrases "climate change", "global warming", and "sustainability" were now banned from our official duties. How was I supposed to teach about the environment in Florida without using those? I was still allowed to say "unusual weather event".

I left this role, and Florida, and heard that this policy had been repealed.

Wouldn't you know it, I heard from some of my colleagues still there that DeSantis just went ahead and did the same thing, while also making sure the new law impacts the energy grid.

So not only is their plan to ignore it - but they want to force no one else to talk about it either, or make any improvements on their own of their own volition.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

But Alabama, specifically, was very against the use of ai and facial recognition and passed a bill to limit it's use. Now they are willing to use it to have a record of exactly when and where they buy ammunition and exactly which caliber? Cognitive disconnect when it's about convenience, huh

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Serious case of Cop-Face

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Wasn't he also a cop in arrested development?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sure you have some aspect of faith (I wasn't there, can't 100% confirm the authenticity of the footage myself), but it's clearly based on quite a solid piece of evidence.

Except that you don't need to have "faith" that this happened, you are able to verify it yourself!! There were reflectors left on the moon that you can shine a significantly strong laser to and have it reflected back if you have a sensor that can pick it back up.

THAT is the point of peer review. To prove that the results in the experiments are reproducible by those using the same equipment, and that faith isn't a requirement - that anyone can verify it and reproduce it.

How would those man-made reflectors have gotten there if not for man going to the moon and placing them there?

view more: next ›