Fox was not a name I expected to see on there given all they've done to supercharge the right-wing, but I suppose even Murdoch isn't crazy enough to actually think that it is a good idea to put Trump back in office

Image manipulation has always been a thing, and there are ways to counter it...

But we already know that a shocking amount of people will simply take what they see at face value, even if it does look suspicious. The volume of AI generated misinformation online is already too damn high, without it getting more new strings in it's bow.

Governments don't seem to be anywhere near on top of keeping up with these AI developments either, so by the time the law starts accounting for all of this, the damage will be long done already.

So the idea behind the ruling is that a lack of non-competes would cause irreparable harm to the companies themselves...

As opposed to the current system that causes harm to the workers, causing them to be unable work in their field of expertise for an arbitrary amount of time, in which they're expected to just find work in a different industry they're not trained in to feed their families.

If these monoliths work as well practically as they do here in a small-scale test, then we might actually have a chance at minimising the damage done by unregulated release of PFAS, which would be good for all of us.

Having said that, I do fear that the rise of these "fix it in post" environmental solutions will be used by big bads to justify the continuation of bad environmental practices because "ThE sCiEnTiStS wIlL jUsT cLeAn It Up AfTeR"

Yeah. If you're on a public forum accessible to anyone, which the whole fediverse is, then you should never assume privacy.

Honestly transparency in this regard would be better - they're already visible to much of the community, so they might as well be visible to everyone.

To be fair, there's a point to be made that someone who's overly trigger-happy on dislike should be shamed for it. Just like you would be if you kept being snide to everyone in real life.

I agree that transparency would do much more good than harm, plus compared to the info that people already put in their profiles/comments, it's not likely to make them anymore identifiable.

Votes should absolutely be public. They were on KBin, and it made people more civil for it because you could be shamed if you were dislike trolling or liking all of your own posts/comments to make them look better (which is something you actively have to do on here, unlike Reddit).

Given this place is pseudo-anonymous anyways, and people comment far more personal and identifiable info here anyways (which tbf you should be careful about), I think public votes would do much more good than harm.

What's the point in making something illegal to patent if you can just side-step it by a technicality and enforce a patent anyway?

If the point was to protect food security, then make it illegal to patent regardless of how the breed was created - sorry if you spent more breeding them artificially, food security for the people should be more important than money.

When even the most reviled dictatorships in the world are voting in favour of the UN recognising food as a right, it sure does make the US look uniquely scummy.

The Tories were in power for almost a decade and a half, only interupted by their own internal power struggles, and the best thing they could come up with to "help" Asylum seekers was the racist and inhumane Rwanda scheme.

Yet Labour repeals that and suddenly they're the bad guys for not being able to undo over a decade of bad decisions in a month.

Conservatives can't see past their own racist noses.

Damn, I would've expected this kind of rhetoric from "ReformUK" or one of the other alt-right parties, but to hear this from someone meant to be representing labour is horrid. Such little empathy towards these people fleeing the horrors of their home countries - deport people like her to Rwanda then see how they feel about what they're advocating for.

Edit: Also, glad to see a new alternative frontend for Xwitter since Nitter got nuked out of existence.

Too many people end up in debt spirals with these BNPL companies because there's no consistent safeguards against it, so we absolutely should be regulating them better. We shouldn't be leaving financially vulnerable people to the wolves.

The OP might want to go to a doctor, cause that last part read like someone having a stroke

Absolutely disgusting. Poor nurses trying to save lives and they're paid back by having these racist EDL cunts throwing rocks at them. Should get Keir Starmer send these pieces of shit over to Rwanda instead, and see how long they last.

As @theskyisfalling@lemmy.dbzer0.com said, these are the same ignorant arses that brought us Brexit, and continue to make our country look like an absolute laughing stock on the world stage.

While completely daft on part of the passport office, I suppose this is a cautionary tale about naming your kids after popular TV characters (particularly those with unique names). Turns out it can cause you a spot of trouble

Wow a Republican with a spine, I didn't think those existed anymore

“If it cannot, it risks losing much of the invaluable investment, tax revenue, and entrepreneurial spirit that they contribute.”

Ah yes, because the rich are truly the most generous class of them all...

• They invest in initiatives designed to make them more money, or to reduce what they pay in taxes.

• They pay the bare minimum possible taxes after playing around with so many loopholes it would make your brain hurt.

• And who could forget that entrepreneurial spirit!

It's the same trickle-down economics argument as always. If the rich leave because they're actually being made to pay their way, the economy would disintegrate because we'd lose businesses like "Arton Capital" that...

"empowers high net worth individuals and families to become global citizens by investing in a second residence or citizenship"

What a tragedy it would be to lose businesses like these! /s

---

Also, is it not slightly biased to have the person the majority of your article about millionaires wanting to leave the UK quotes be the CEO of this company above who makes their money helping millionaires leave the UK?

That'd be like me getting an ice-cream man to discuss people wanting more ice-cream during the summer. Like even if it was true, you couldn't have picked a less biased source?

Sounds great until you realise these rules, with respect to POWs, are broken so often that they're barely worth the paper they're written on.

As far as the companies go, their lack of resources is an entirely self-inflicted problem, because they're won't invest in increasing those resources, like more IT infrastructure and staff. It's the same as many companies that keep terrible backups of their data (if any) when they're not bound to by the law, because they simply don't want to pay for it, even though it could very well save them from ruin.

The crowdstrike incident was as bad as it was exactly because loads of companies had their eggs in one basket. Those that didn't recovered much quicker. Redundancy is the lesson to take from this that none of them will learn.

I think what @riskable@programming.dev was saying is you shouldn't have multiple mission critical systems all using the same 3rd party services. Have a mix of at least two, so if one 3rd party service goes down not everything goes down with it