You have a poor understanding of sales tax bud

Ok, yeah, sure, but the title doesn’t even make sense as a sentence.

Wtf is this title?

I mean yes to the sentiment but it would be quite a bit different if these artists signed a distribution contract with the AI company saying they got a miniscule percentage of royalties for every track somebody generated or even licensed this music to train on whatsoever.

Those are the hadiths which is kinda like a state law vs a national law where the national law overpowers the state law (except in specific circumstances) or how the us constitution overrides national law. The quran is the only book that’s the word of God, and if you take all the hadiths as truth you open Islam up to all kinds of other critiques. Besides that, the shia/sunni split has a ton of hadith issues where they only treat some as truth and not others. For the record it’s not just Muslims or something. All of the Abrahamic religions are immensely fucked and I’m pretty sure I could make a similar case for most others. Even fucking Buddhism is being used to justify an ethnic cleansing rn.

You have definitely made me reflect on what I said and I shouldn’t have made such a claim when I don’t really know what I’m talking about entirely.

The worst part of calc was honestly the rude awakening that my algebra skills needed woooork

Jsyk in this specific context it’s hanged. Weird right?

Like:

Hanged from the neck until death

I can prove objectively that religion is bad for humanity. Can you do the same about atheism? There’s a huge difference between the two. We respect people, not their beliefs. If someone’s a racist, that’s a belief with just as much evidence (aka none/blind faith) as a religion. Do I have to respect their religions? I do think it’s really sad that these people died, though I view it as an easily preventable occurrence, and mostly the fault of those that partook. (The same way that I viewed the submarine)

That’s not what the term martyr means when we’re referring to Islam tho. They’re usually referring to Jihad which is much more specific. (And problematic)

Also, imagine thinking an American dictionary and en English word mean anything when the only ‘true’ reading of this religion is Arabic

Not in that country they ain’t. At least not about most things.

Poes law?

The corvette is the best track car for the price by far, same with certain camaros. And I’m not talking about Nascar tracks, I mean nordschleife times.

I prefer basing my opinions on logic, arguments, and facts over feelings. Your inability to articulate a response to certain arguments shows why this is still a debate. Further, you’re relying on the idea that something is crazy to you, therefore it should be to everybody, but that’s not how it works. There’s racist people that use this exact type of reasoning to support their racism.

E.G.

“Black people are less than white people”

logical counterpoint logical counterpoint

“WTF do you need a reasoning that black people are less than white people”

If your position is really stronger, then it shouldn’t be hard for you to make arguments in favor of it.

You provided exactly zero reasoning for most of your statements and have now taken a condescending position. People like you are why we can’t have nice things in the world.

Some do. Some, like Shaq or Ryan Reynolds (or Kanye) use their money to invest in other companies. Ryan Reynolds coming out and saying Nazi shit would probably be bad for Mint, just like Ye’s controversy was bad for Yeezy, just like Elon’s controversy is bad for Tesla.

Just realized clean drinking water, electricity, transport infrastructure, etc. isn’t important. The things you think are important to the world are only important because most people in first world countries have never had to face true hardship in their lives as a result of technological advancement.

I’m not talking about string theory. Scientists disagree about things at a high level all the time. It’s how the fields move forward. They don’t disagree on the fundamentals though, which social sciences have a tendency to.

I’m not here to say the social sciences are useless. In fact I’ve stated several times that I think people need to be able to understand them and use them. I’m arguing something different entirely and I don’t know why you keep strawmanning me. It’s not about some ideological purity but a basic difference in the ability to learn things because of our inability to control the relevant variables.

I think you just don’t understand what I’m saying. All that may be true but then you would need to control for ALL those variables for good science which you just cannot do in the social sciences.

They’re important, just not really good science. They’re useful, but not in the way physics is. There aren’t competing theories of the most basic levels of understanding in the hard sciences. There are throughout the entirety of the fields of the social sciences.

I don’t think she does cracks technically, right? They’re repacks I thought

Lots of words to say I have no proof and provide only conjecture.

Seems more like religion and blind belief to me. I agree that you can’t define consciousness in terms of particles… yet. But to say it’s impossible is a huge leap. High level biology is basically all physics and chem for this reason; it’s emergent from the 2 together. That doesn’t mean that you can’t define biological processes in terms of their chemical and physical activities though. It’s kind of like free will: we think we have it because we make ‘choices’ but at the end of the day our brain is just a series of particles, so where does the free will come from? Are we just deluding ourselves?