SparroHawc

why is there no pushback from him, his lawyers, or people who know him?

His lawyers are being sensible and saving it for the trial.

He was probably told by his lawyers to do the same.

He lived alone IIRC, so he might not have an alibi. However, he was wearing clothes that were similar - but not identical - to the Adjuster, which.. if he was changing clothes to shake off pursuit, you think he'd wear something very different instead.

The NYPD was probably under immense pressure from rich people to find the culprit - so they found a patsy. Wouldn't be the first time. The ridiculous thing is all the news outlets loudly talking about how Luigi committed the murder as if it's a foregone conclusion. Also probably from immense pressure from rich people. Someone needs to be punished, in a very public way, to keep the plebians in line.

Nostalgia.

There's been a blatant push by media to forward the idea that Luigi did it. All they have to do is ... not report evidence to the contrary. What there IS, however, is a lack of evidence that he did it, if you take into consideration the fact that NYPD - who have a history of faking evidence - probably used a gun and fake manifesto to pin the crime on him. Innocent until proven guilty has gone out the window; even news outlets aren't bothering to hedge their language with 'alleged' any more.

LLMs are AI as much as the enemies in a game are AI. It's not General AI though, which companies really seem to want people to believe it is.

Because it's beneficial for the software company's reputation. People are more likely to buy the software when they know that it's not going to get a permanently unpatched zero-day the moment the next version comes out.

The problem is that we see that sort of argument all the time on the internet, which gives us a skewed view of Republicans. The right wing is loud, even leaving out the shills trying to stir the pot.

Not even close to all software. There was a broad mix of stuff that used 2-digit years that would have had problems with it, stuff that used 2-digit years where it wouldn't really impact anything, and stuff that used 4-digit years and so wasn't a problem.

However, if it drove any sort of critical infrastructure, it had to be audited just in case it fit in the first category.

My dude, just because the Catholic Church won't stop being the Catholic Church doesn't make a progressive pope a bad idea.

If you think that'll stop them, I have a bridge to sell you. In case you hadn't noticed, the law doesn't mean anything any more to the people in power.

Part of the purpose of debate is to find the holes in an argument so you can fix them. If you don't understand your weaknesses, you can't guard against them. That is why people play devil's advocate.

Especially when your argument is as full of holes as 'some corporations do horrible things, so clearly making implications about an evil corporation, no matter how wrong, is the right thing to do'.

It would probably be a pyrrhic victory though.

You picked a side

Yeah. They picked truth and honesty over sensationalism.

Spreading lies about corporations doesn't help. They're bad enough anyways; we don't need to make up stories about them to paint them in a bad light, they're perfectly capable of painting themselves.