(I didn’t know, I have never coded python at a professional level - but I will take your word for it!)

Sounds to me like the failure wasn’t yours, but the interviewer’s; you came prepared for questions relevant to the role, and they went all out-of-pocket on you.

Like if you show up for a tech job and they start going “paint me a word picture… tell me about your personal philosophy…”

Like you said, if they just googled some BS to ask you, or followed the corp-approved “starting questions”, that’s their fault.

Maybe you could reach out to them (or HR?)and go “hey, I was surprised by some of the interview questions, but I really do think I’m a strong match - can we get together and come to an understanding on the relevance of those questions?”

A scoop of vanilla ice cream, topped with a little “chili crunch” oil - salty and sweet, spicy and creamy… it’s great.

I don’t go to McDonalds much any more, but I’d get fries and a vanilla shake to do that with, as a treat!

I remember reading at the start of Covid in the US, when the government was saying “masks are dumb”, but local churches were going “masks save lives”, the churches were surprised at how much pushback they were getting.

Turns out raising someone from a young age to believe without questioning, and look up to one person as their only source of truth, and ignore compelling scientific evidence, is pretty hard conditioning to break.

Shockedpikachuface.jpg, #leopardsatemyface, etc.

Seconded - Fuuuuuuck that jelly-bean-eating bastard.

I do like jelly beans though.

I think you have a valid point that echo chambers are bad, and that we should all strive to find good sources and not just rely one one side of the story.

But -

I think we have. Lots of people understand that idea, and lots of people have kept open channels to ideas outside what they believe. And I can only speak for myself, but MY “other side” time observing and participating in conservative forums online, talking with people in my very-red state, and watching Fox News, has done nothing to convince me that i need to hear one god-damn word from either of those two lying, conniving jack-asses.

One dude’s opinion. Your mileage may vary. Please consult your doctor before starting any kind of exercise program. Thanks for your time.

Who f’ing cares…. Neither of those two has anything to say, that needs to be heard.

I like it!

My thoughts as well… “here’s what to know: the Supreme Court is corrupt as hell”

Strong stuff, and I’m here for it! I hope he suffers the indignity of itching, without the relief of scratching!

Unironically, I totally agree. Commentator is dumb and redundant, commenter is the superior alternative.

Just because you do it for a living, doesn’t mean that it’s a different title; a carpenter doesn’t become a carpentator because it’s a paying job. A pilot doesn’t become a pilotator when they get paid for it.

I feel like the current establishment wouldn’t allow an FDR-style candidate to succeed, they’re making too much money from protecting the status quo.

But I’ll still grudgingly support them if Trump is the other option. I’ll vote progressive in my local elections, but as long as we still have a first-to-the-post election process, it’s always the lesser of two evils.

Isn’t it the case that whoever wins this one, they’ll be the oldest president in US history? Gross.

Saddling up to the bar of a cyberpunk ramen shop to ask real questions with my real voice

I want this guy to argue with me at the ramen shop:

https://piped.video/watch?v=xkkNvMgza1g&t=50

“Four…no, two,two; four! (sigh)… with noodles.”

The enemy gate is down, Ender!

High-speed rail

I’m certainly no legal expert, but I think it’s the rights of the family that are being infringed upon. I don’t know a thing about the Carlins specific situation, but I think it’s customary for a famous person to leave control of their “intellectual property”, use of their likeness and whatever else, to their next of kin or a trusted friend or someone. And it sounds like the family have those rights, because they’re looking into “what their rights are” (which sounds a lot like “legal options” to me).

I personally think it’s in bad taste specifically BECAUSE the person is deceased - they can’t make the call and go “yeah go ahead” or “I don’t like this, please stop”. Kind of like how someone can’t consent to sex if they’re unconscious (weird parallel, I know).

I feel like the YouTubers are assuming Carlin’s consent, when they don’t really have it. If they’d asked his family, they could have maybe had it. But instead they decided to just go ahead and hope that they can get away with it.

I think Carlin’s daughter has every right to be pissed about not getting asked for her permission, especially if she owns the rights to his material.

Not OP but for me, I think it pivots on the permission of those who knew the comedian best and who might be hurt the most by not asking.

Whether AI writes the jokes, some 3rd party, or the comedian themself did, does the family want that out there, or would it be painful for Robin Williams’ family (remember that he killed himself) to watch a computer ape Williams’ comedy? If you’ve had a loved one pass away, would you want to be asked before someone made an AI of them performing jokes? And would it make it better or worse if the AI did an inferior job of replicating the original person?

Even if Carlin had planned a show, if the wishes of the family were that it be performed by Carlin himself or nobody, then I don’t think anyone had the right to turn an AI loose on the material to “give it a shot”.

Beyond that, I wonder if they have the legal right to use Carlin’s likeness, mannerisms, etc.

LOL “jug hooters”… I love it!

I wish they’d required him to endure cross-examination… I’d love to see a competent lawyer dismantle his entire baloney-sandwich machine in front of his followers.