Who’s griping? I’m simply pointing out the distraction you all seem to be falling for.

People will believe whatever the internet tells them to.

Nearly every YouTube video I watch is narrated by AI. I usually call it out in the comments and request people stop watching their shit videos until they hired human beings to voice them.

I came here as a result of them fucking over 3rd party app developers. Never once have been banned by Reddit.

Anything Google, but it’s not because of their advertising- it’s just because of who they are.

It’s little more than an outrage piece designed to provoke anger and get page hits.

It’s a nothing-burger. I would bet money that prior to this piece, no one here or anywhere wondered what the host of Jeopardy thought of Gavin Newsom.

And therein lies my point.

And who asked you your thoughts when you commented?

Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard…

This, in-and-of-itself, is an oxymoron and by merit of its own incompatibility with reality, needs to be dismissed as an irrelevant statement- and never written, or spoken aloud again.

Fine if you want to think it, but you really shouldn’t.

And somehow this is news…. Can we get Pat Sajak to weigh in? What about Bob Eubanks? Clearly we need to know what game show hosts think!

But in fairness…. In a country where there is supposed to be a separation of church and state- the nuance in this should be a non-starter.

The American government has no place even in prescient to protect or uphold religious tenant.

EDIT: I’ll add that if someone confesses to a priest that they raped and/or killed a child, and that priest DOESN’T go to authorities, then they are complicit in the crime and should be incarcerated along with the rapist.

I’m guessing you didn’t even stop to think that this isn’t about you or what you’ve experienced, or that it has nothing to do with you at all for that matter.

The mods are bound to enforce the rules as stated by the country that hosts the instance. Nothing more.

If you’re here to suggest violence as a response to things you disagree with- and you are here to do this despite it being stated clearly in the ToS that it’s against the rules, then it’s on you.

You don’t get carte blanche to violate the rules just because you have a personal connection to the subject.

That is correct. No.

Appreciate the response, and- gross!

Wish you a speedy recovery and solid poo.

AI isn’t art, so… no.

And reality shows that if the protest voters had enough common sense to realize our democracy was at stake, Harris would have won.

I’m not talking about the would-be Trump voters who sat out. I’m talking specifically about the assholes who would have voted against trump, and were given every promise that he would do EXACTY what he is doing now- and still chose not to.

I’m talking about the fuckwits that knew what we were up against, and decided they’d rather punish an entire country for not producing their depiction of a flawless candidate.

The fuck does this have to do with Colbert?

Did you try following the conversation?

My goodness, that’s a fine edit you did there my guy! Made me have to go and edit my own just so that it made sense!

But again, to answer your original question, I’m going to have to ask you to just follow the conversation. It’s not that complicated to see how I arrived at this conclusion.

There will always be single-issue protest clowns. We can only hope that from this, enough of them will have learned that there are consequences for inaction.

No.

Define “the public”. And then illustrate how this means fuck-all in the long run?

Who in their right mind would want to talk to AI begin with? I don’t think I’ll ever understand why someone would want to do this outside of a single instance of curiosity.