How else did you get music?

flex X on the fools does verbose logs only.

Can’t be just an oversight. This has to be an intentional design decision. The “simple” (and economical) way to build this system is to build it so that the scan reads the price from a database and that price is then displayed and used to sum the total.

Keeping two prices, a display and a real one, is a design decision that adds a complexity to the system, makes it more difficult to administer and is an intentional design decision, especially if the numbers are allowed to differ.

A coupon not being applied correctly could be a mistake with that coupon. A sale not being taken into account, a problem with that sale or that UPC entry in the database. Those could be issues with data entry and data management.

This is different. This is intentional. And I’d bet, we’ve just found someone either cheating the tax man or embezzling funds.

If there’re two different items calculations one “real” one and “display” that’s an intentional choice made because they know there can be discrepancies.

Did they call someone over when they saw the discrepancy? Because, you know, mistakes happen.

Not in software. The software is doing exactly what it was programmed to do.

Mark it as spam.

• trying to install any software that isn’t already packaged explicitly for Ubuntu is a nightmare because there is no equivalent of the AUR for people to push build steps to and you’re quite often left guessing what dependencies you need to install to get something to compile

In fairness it does have the PPA system which predates the AUR and does provide a good job of providing third party amd semi-third party software.

But you’re right that Ubuntu has sold out on building snaps for software instead of ppas.

Claiming customers damaged things that were manufacturing issues is fraud. Tesla should likely be shut down for that action alone. But that would never happen.

Apple reportedly built a version of iMessages for Android a long time ago. Then they realized how many phones their bubble scheme sold and reversed course.

UnitedHeathcareade me reconsidery absolutionist stance against terrorism.

In the 20s Gaza was a tourist destination.

Has WikiLeaks every published a false leak? Why would he not be trustworthy?

They were never able to be called unauthenticated. They were published with DKIM signatures from the beginning.

They weren’t able to add more because a Republican Congress cut down approved funding to do so.

The “like your plan you can keep it” depended on private insurance continuing to offer plans that would not be tax advantaged. No additional funding was needed to see that that wasn’t going to be viable.

It’s not okay but it’s not as big of a deal as you’re making it, moreover it’s been well reported that she renounced it apologized and since corrected it, so it’s more to the point that it doesn’t support your original argument.

At the beginning of the scandal, the content of those emails were treated as faked and the first response from the media was to self censor stories about them.

That’s actually part of what made it a bigger story, is that when it later came out that they were real instead of people finding out about it months and months ago they found out in bits and pieces over time. In that instance the censorship actually likely hurt the Clinton’s more than it helped; but the outrage is still felt mostly on the right as they saw it as another in a long line of censorship decisions that targeted the right.

The only reason he accurately predicted the outcome of Obamacare is because as soon as Republican states no longer had a democratic leadership to contend with they gutted the programs and made them a hollow form of their former selves. Predicting that isn’t exactly rocket science if you’re the one causing it.

That’s not actually true. Once the plans were no longer eligible to add new members in; they became plans that could no longer add news subscribers into; meaning that the Insurance companies would have an ever decreasing group of people to pool their money with; making the plans ever more risky. Most of those plans stopped being offered long before Republican governors choose to not expand Medicare coverage.

As for all your other stuff I don’t think we need to go farther than bringing up Clinton’s emails to see that your arguments are reaching.

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/

These emails are valid emails. They’re not fakes. During the election; media outlets treated them as if they were fakes.

Well it’s likely because both sides have seen instances where something that is absolutely true be silenced with a “disinformation” or “false news” justification. In recent memory, it has been more “left supporting” news stories that have been silenced than “right supporting” ones that have been falsely silenced. But in recent memory:

• Joe Biden’s son’s laptop. Later confirmed to not be Russian and to be accurate.
• Various emails from the Clinton Campaign being leaked. Claimed to be faked but largely proven accurate at the time of the leak (via DKIM) and with future legal action.
• Several stories about Biden’s declining health. Some of these during the primary pissed of the Bernie wing of the party for being silenced, some during the general pissed off Trump supporters. Biden is 80 years old. Everyone 80 years old has declining health but discussion of it was generally verboten.
• “Lab Leak Hypothesis” Still not proven true or false but believable enough that several government agencies believe it to be credible.
• Origins of the “Russia Collision” story being a person affiliated with Clinton/DNC.

And there’s a long list of obviously biased “fact checkers” making obvious mistakes. Like claiming Romney was lieing when he accurately predicted the outcome of Obamacare a claim that they would call the lie of the year on behalf Obama for repeating in 2013. I pick on polifact for being left leaning but there’s similar right wing “fact checkers” doing similarly biased fact checks.

That’s a good point.

Historically, I know that a big way that the dissemination of these sort of images was stopped was by using copyright law (because they’re using the likeness of the subject). I’m worried how that will work if there’s no copyright law to fall back in.

In the US a photoshopped nude would be copyrightable. But courts here have said that AI generated content doesn’t get the benefits of copyright.

Given that AI images and media can’t be copyrighted, does the nominal “subject” have any recourse?