mupuff1234

Doesn't this already fall under consumer protection laws? False advertisement & consumer fraud.

I didn't say they would, just refuting the claim that:

What is surprising is how co-opted the Biden admin was by Israel, that they didn't even bother to even consider reentering it

Except Biden did try to restart the talks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93United_States_rel...

Israel would be deeply impacted by the results of the negotiations, so is this surprising or unexpected? Any nation including the US would most likely do the same in a similar scenario over what is considered to be almost existential negotiations.

Are proctored in-person exams not the default for most places anyway?

But you still have the commit/pr history.

Not sure what adding the ramblings with an LLM will add.

What will chat history give you that the output of that chat won't?

Wouldn't be surprised if companies with too much "superstar" talent suffer from the same issues as sport teams usually do.

Claiming something doesn't make it true.

Zealousy has a pretty strong meaning, there's not much room for interpretation.

It basically means support at all costs, and very meaningful support (funding, supplies, armament)

Most applications just need good enough design.

America has zealously supported Israel since the 1940's

That's just straight up not true.

Does Meta not harvest data on a massive scale? Not sure what exactly is the issue with doing a series on that.

People are looking for conspiracy theories when the truth is simple - trump did it because he thought it would be an easy quick win that will put him in the history books.

That proxy war never reached China or the US borders.

The Israel - Iran proxy war is happening on/in Israel's borders, it's way more "direct", and not happening in some far away land.

Could you imagine if a Chinese proxy attacked the US directly?

Sure, but Iran did sponsor proxies that did attack Israel. And whether something is direct war or proxy war feels more like meaningless semantics imo.

Historically speaking I think it's clear Iran has been the aggressor in this specific conflict.

Not that I think Israel took smart actions, but that's a different matter.

Pretty sure police brutality was invented way before Israel existed.

They can always do a lot of stuff, but it's just not very likely.

And they did bomb nuclear facilities - nobody is denying that.

Even this time, excluding the tragic school event, there have been very minimal number of casualties compared to the amount of munitions being used, so clearly not a Gaza scenario at all.

I doubt it.

Assuming the US does these kinds of operations it will likely target only high value targets like the rebuilding of a nuclear facility etc

So it's gonna be very targeted and limited in scope, as opposed to Gaza.

Pretty sure the US already does that. Every once in a while you'll hear about a strike on ISIS etc.

And I'm guessing there's lots of operations you don't exactly hear about.

That's not what I said.

My point is saying that the iranian regime is doing anything "in good faith" is just beyond absurd.

They have long lost the ability to claim that any of their actions are in good faith.

Is it? Are you claiming nuclear bombs are not both essential and also a risk to national security?

Aren't all the AI companies saying that AI poses even a greater threat to humanity than nukes?

How can these two not be deeply connected? If a technology poses humanity extinction level of risk of course it will also be a matter of national security - how can it not be?

My principals is that a government should do what's good for the people of their country.

Are your principals that a government should only focus on self preservation?

What would be better for the people of Iran, sinking an American aircraft carrier or just disbanding their nuclear and long range ballistic missile programs?

Economic collapse, failed infrastructure, lack of human rights, ruthless religious dictatorship? All while spending 25% of their budget on military ventures.

Just to name a few.

Because those countries are not trying to become a global power, with potential nuclear weapon, ICBM and drone capabilities along with a strategic location?

And all while making "death to america" part of their national slogan.

Just look at hate crime stats.

You completely miss the fact that the same R&D Israel has done would have cost 100x more if it were done by US based companies.

The US gains massive cheap R&D and real world tested capabilities for a fraction of the price it would pay domestically.

Now you could argue about the moral implications, but money wise it's a great deal.

Both. Jews are indigenous to the land, and you also had Jewish communities living all over the middle east throughout history untill they moved to Israel.

You know Jews are from the levant, right?