Maybe you could use different timetables in summer and winter, so that only the relevant part of activities is affected, not everything indiscriminately. This would also make it possible to cater to local needs much better instead of simply fixing school hours from 9 to 15 and adjusting the clock that it falls into daylight.
Then local businesses would have to shift their hours to support parents with kids. And before you know it, you’ve effectively shifted everyone’s clock anyway.
No, executive orders can't change law and international law, unless ratified by congress, is not democratically legitimized and applicable law in the US to begin with
War Powers Resolution. Obviously, there’s a law of which multiple presidents have used. Congress can change this law but there is a law that does give the POTUS this authority.
Nope, the War Powers Resolution gives the president broad authority to respond to an active attack on the United States (which makes sense). But it does not allow the President to unilaterally start an aggressive war against some random country without Congressional approval.
Not that we live in country where laws or the Constitution matter much right now. It's theoretically possible that some people might someday be prosecuted for breaking laws or violating people's Constitutional rights. But even there, I world expect that many of the law breakers will simply be pardoned.
What about the argument that Congress has always gone along with this in the past?
I mean it isn't quite that stark, but the last president that actually asked congress for and got a declaration of war was Roosevelt. The last president that asked for and got permission for the use of military force was George Bush (junior) after 9/11 (obv. he meant against the Taliban).
Which means all US conflicts are "based on" George Bush's approval for use of military force, about 1 per presidential term: military intervention in Lybia, the campaign against ISIS, campaign against Syria and Iraq militias/continuation against ISIS, and now Iran. Iran is a different scale I guess, but ...
It's not new in the sense that any of its components are new, and it's not new in the sense that similar things had not been done before, it's new in the sense that putting the right components together in the right way suddenly created something capable of starting a viral hype.
Essentially, as I understand it, it is a personal AI assistant running on your computer, integrated with different systems (like email, chat).
It's not that life wants to continue existing, it's that life is what continues existing. That's not a moral standard, but a matter of causality, that life that lacks in "want" to continue existing mostly stops existing.
I disagree, this we don't know. You treat life as if persistence is it's overarching quality, but rocks also persist and a rock that keeps persisting through time has nothing that resembles wanting. I could be a bit pedantic and say that life doesnt want to keep existing but genes do.
But what I really want to say is that wanting to live is a prerequisite to the evolutionary proces where not wanting to live is a self filtering causality. When we have this discussion the word wanting should be correctly defined or else we risk sitting on our own islands.
The moral standard isn't trying to explain why life wants to exist. That's what evolution explains. Rather, the moral standard is making a judgement about how we should respond to life's already evolved desire to exist.
Do you think conscious beings actually experience wanting to continue existing, or is even that subjective feeling just a story we tell about mechanical processes?
That doesn't work when the Chinese produce uncensored open weight models, or ones that can easily be adapted to create uncensored content.
Censorship for generative AI simply doesn't work the way we are used to, unless we make it illegal to posess a model that might generate illegal content, or that might have been trained on illegal data.
> Censorship for generative AI simply doesn't work the way we are used to, unless we make it illegal to posess a model that might generate illegal content, or that might have been trained on illegal data.
Censorship doesn't work for stuff that is currently illegal. See pirated movies.
You mean, if you would apply the inverse of the standard romanization of Mandarin, the resulting sound would be closer to the Japanese sound, if starting from the Kunrei spelling than if starting from the Hepburn spelling?
You can run it with a 5090 and the standard ComfyUI template, it just offloads some parts to RAM. Image generation takes about a minute for sizes like 1024x1024.
