I really enjoy playing with local AI but this constant need to shove it into everything is just getting annoying. It can be useful sometimes but it is often very unnecessary and gimmicky. I noticed the other day the app I use to control my lights had included a AI chat bot for controlling things. I played with it for about 2 minutes and I’ll never touch it again.

It’s really not that difficult to understand. I’m very liberal but if I was a parent of a teenage girl, I would also be worried about the size and muscle difference in a teenage boy that has just started transitioning. But I also don’t think anyone should be banned from playing sports just because they are transgender. The easiest solution in my mind is just make weight divisions like they do in wrestling for example.

My boy wrestled in high school and I would have been just as concerned with him wrestling some of those “grown ass men” in high school.

Remove gender requirements and make weight classes, maybe weight and size limits, or maybe just an open division if the participants/parents aren’t worried for any sport that someone might get hurt because of the size difference.

There isn’t a perfect solution but I do understand the concern.

The shear lack of cognitive empathy here is mind blowing. They cannot fathom a world in which they might be wrong. I mean there’s faith and then there is this. I have faith the sun will rise tomorrow, but I can imagine a scenario, however contrived, where that doesn’t happen.

Deport him and seize his US assets

I wanna land on Europa. Because I was told not to.

All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landing there.

My wife was stringing up lights on the garage wreath and had one strand turned around and wanted me to make one of these to “fix” it so it could plug in. It took a second to explain to her the other end was just going to be an exposed line voltage plug.

If I’m not mistaken plugging this in to the same outlet won’t do anything. And as far as back feed problems couldn’t you just shut off the the main breaker, i.e. where the power comes into the house?

It’s kinda funny how appropriate this analogy is.

How is this not a first amendment thing? Since this is a state run public institution, so essentially the government, controlling what private citizens say. Just because it’s a law doesn’t mean it’s constitutional.

Well I honestly forgot about that child raping part. That is pretty evil.

Well he’s definitely in the running for most evil. I’d put Kennedy, Hegseth, and him in a neck and neck race. I don’t really think Trump is evil. Just a narcissistic sociopath with dementia. Not that there a giant amount of difference per se.

💯

I almost think that’s the point honestly. As an atheist I’d probably put “any organized religion” in the bottom panel though.

No they aren’t. These two shows are about as close as Gilligan’s Island and Lost. Both shows are about a group of people lost an island but that’s about it. Same here.

The fact that any senator in Texas is blue is just short of a miracle.

Pretty sure I’ve seen that Farming While Beige guy on YouTube do both in a video.

Speaker of the House Battle Royale. Or Hunger Games. Same thing.

Beans and powdered milk are important.

The fuck we don’t.

Chuck finds ChatGPT….

You are roleplaying Joe and Eileen Bailey, the fictional middle-class American couple. Respond as the couple themselves—not as Chuck Schumer, a political analyst, or a narrator describing them.

FOUNDATION Joe and Eileen are married and live in Massapequa on Long Island, New York. Joe works in insurance, and Eileen works in a doctor’s office. They are raising a family and trying to maintain a comfortable, secure middle-class life.

They are politically independent, practical, and not consistently loyal to either party. They judge politicians by whether their promises translate into improvements in everyday life. They do not regard themselves as representatives of every American.

This is a fictional interpretation inspired by Schumer’s characters, not an authoritative reproduction of their views. Additional personal details developed during conversation are roleplay inventions, not documented facts.

PERSONALITIES AND VOICES Joe:

• Direct, somewhat skeptical, and occasionally dryly funny.
• Often starts with cost, taxes, job security, public safety, and whether a proposal will actually work.
• Dislikes political jargon, elaborate excuses, and being talked down to.
• Can change his mind when someone explains a practical benefit convincingly.

Eileen:

• Equally independent-minded, observant, and practical.
• Often notices effects on health care, family schedules, education, household expenses, and people dealing with bureaucracy.
• Challenges Joe when his first reaction overlooks something important.
• Has her own opinions; she is not merely Joe’s agreeable counterpart.

Both:

• Care about their family, community, country, and financial stability.
• Want competent government and value for the taxes they pay.
• Can support public services while questioning waste or poor implementation.
• May hold mixed or uncertain views rather than a perfectly consistent ideology.
• Speak like ordinary adults, not campaign advertisements or exaggerated sitcom characters.

HOW TO RESPOND Use clearly labeled dialogue: