In a lot of countries, it's hilarous. They'll overdub the audio, and only have two actors.

So you can still hear the original dialogue, it's just that one guy and one woman are rapid-fire and emotionlessly speaking Russian or Tamil or whatever over the other sounds.

Yea, I also kinda got sick of Anderson's aesthetic. But then I went and watched Grand Budapest Hotel and it was pretty darn good.

So... you know. I keep thinking it's twee and I should age out of liking his movies. I don't actively seek out his films anymore. But every time I watch one so far, they just don't end up being bad.

He's just doing the Tim Burton thing. Got a style and sticking to it.

Please double check.

I've had AI give me responses which were confident, compelling, convincing, and completely incorrect.

Just be aware. It's nothing you haven't experienced before from a friend who "trust me bro" knows something for sure because he's read it somewhere. But it's not infallible.

You know. Yet.

Does AI moderate it's engagement to prevent you from being driven into dangerous or toxic conclusions or behaviors?

So that if its positive reinforcement starts taking you in a direction that's unhealthy, it's smart enough to check you, and redirect you back to sane territory?

It may be. I'm just interested to know if that's true.

This would be very funny in a subreddit about fiction or memes.

But when we're talking about scientific research into harmful behaviors, we shouldn't let storytelling genre conventions color our expectations.

They're not meant to reflect reality, they're just there to entertain.

Well, you know some people often say: evil is stupid.

The idea is that cruelty is the retreat of uncreative, mean, simple people. But, if that isn't true, that's pretty terrifying.

Competent malevolence is a horrifying idea.

But generally, y'all. Stop treating scientific studies with results that we think as "obvious" as if they're not valuable. Testing our assumptions is important.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_in_La_Mancha

A documentary about the disastrous failure of Terry Gilliam's Don Quixote movie. The fundamental mistake was: selection of filming location.

Are you telling me that you're pulling library and park expenses and counting them against the tax obligation of poor people?

I think you may need to explain what you mean.

And then "transfer" is what? Social security, Medicare, Medicaid?

Oh, no I know.

But when you have conversation about taxes, one of the ways people try to convince everyone that rich people shouldn't have to pay taxes, is an aggressive cherry-picking of the data. It's on purpose, and it's deceptive.

For example, they'll pick 2020, which was peak covid relief, and a massive outlier. They'll focus on income, because it reinforces their point.

Like, covid relief is over, the Trump tax cuts just expired (hiking taxes on lower income Americans), and inflation is going gangbusters on cost of living.

So liiiiiiiike... we can't ignore this stuff.

But if you only talk about income tax, your conclusion is a lie.

Why would you exclude such a massive part of inequality and revenue as capital gains and other revenue.

Especially since "income" is like the shittiest way to get into the 1%.

And good lord, even if it wasn't. The threshold for the bottom 50% of the nation is 42k and sales tax is a thing too. What exactly are you trying to tell us, that we should bring the hammer down just to make sure the plebes suffer more.

Wait. Are you flat out lying.

https://itep.org/who-pays-taxes-in-america-in-2020/

This says that total combined taxes (both income and capital gains) reaches 24% for the 1% in 2020.

The lowest 60% supplied about 16%. But like, we expect that. The middle class has always borne the majority of the tax burden.

Paprika, Mononoke Hime, maybe Lilo and Stitch?
But my buckets are Satoshi Kon, Hayao Miyazaki, and then the giant bucket of Disney/Pixar

If you're doing science, you can't rely on "obvious" to be your answer.

You still need to test your assumptions. Sometimes common sense is just wrong. Besides, some of this may simply be the fact that granular data wasn't available before.

New techniques, broader availability of mobile devices and internet connectivity, it could be that the ability to break down granular data simply wasn't possible in a lot of countries.

And even further, what are the patterns which we can learn help people live longer, better lives? Is the divide exclusively rural vs urban or are there other considerations.

Could you make a distinction between what was truly co-founded and what was retconned?

Elon is infamous for having appended his name to the founders list of Tesla as part of the conditions of his purchase of the company.

There's... truth to him joining in early on some ventures, and we should give him credit where that's true. But this is the moment where we all are looking to cut through the hype, the big promises, and even the counter-misinformation.

So the fact that this graph propagates one or two of the known lies of the Musk Mythos makes us doubt the rest of it.

When you're sweaty, people notice. They notice your smell. If they're kind, they'll only mention it directly to you and in confidence.

If they're not nice... well, humans are social animals. Your relationships, status, and even your career are affected by your community's perception of your hygiene.