lol

I think it’s easy to get sidetracked on “magic” vs. “law”. It seems clear to me that both of these ideas are tied up in human interpretation, otherwise we wouldn’t be able to have a disagreement about them, we’d simply look up the correct meaning for “magical rules that govern vampires”.

I suspect that we have a fundamental disagreement that we’re not going to resolve with debate, but I’ll take one more shot anyway.

I appreciate that you’ve given a pretty succinct definition of your position: to summarize, you can only invite someone to a place where you live, although you can also invite someone into a place when you are already inside that place, regardless of whether you live there.

Can a person who lives on the street invite a vampire? If so, then a vampire is circumscribed from any outdoor location where a person lives (sans invitation); and if not, we see that “where a person lives” is not actually the deciding concept.

If you own multiple homes, which of them do you “live” in? Can a vampire enter all the others? Do you have to be in the home at the time of the invitation, or could you invite a vampire to use your summer house for a month while you’re in your winter home?

All of these things cloud the idea that “living in” a place is not actually all that straightforward, and still requires the interpretation of mankind to be meaningful to the vampire. Indeed, I think the magic relies on the consent of a human, not the literal words of an invitation, and consent is innately tied to interpretation by the person consenting.

However, if anyone in the home can make the invitation, then I think the way this plays out is: the vampire cop gets a warrant, one of the other cops goes inside, and then shouts at the vampire to come inside, and then you’re boned anyway.

Why should it care about the religion of man, then?

For that matter, why should it care about the invitation of man?

If there are rules a vampire must follow, and those rules can be satisfied through the agency of human beings, having been interpreted by human beings, then we have to consider what a human being means by invitation.

If a 4-year-old invites a vampire into his parents’ house, does that count? It’s not his house, either. If you think that a vampire can enter on the invitation of a 4-year-old then you must concede that people other than the owner can invite someone in. If you think that invitation is not valid, then you must concede that a vampire respects a hierarchy of rights.

I think that the state asserts a right to invite other people into your house which supersedes your right to prevent them. We call that overriding invitation a warrant.

I think it’s very much like regular ice cream, but a flavor an octopus would eat.

Crab, maybe.

Right. Again, though, I don’t recommend having an LLM do that particular chore for you.

I don’t disagree, but most business emails aren’t quite that strict.

Sometimes the only requirement IS to have words on a page. Think about a disaster recovery plan, for example. Now, you probably don’t want an LLM to write your disaster recovery plan, but it’s a perfect example of something where the main value is that you wrote it down, and now you can be certified that you have one.

This is a legitimate use case for LLM, though.

Not everyone can communicate clearly. Not everyone can summarize well. So the panel on the right is great for the people on the other end, who must read your poorly-communicated thoughts.

At the same time, some things must look like you put careful thought and time into your words. Hence, the panel on the left.

And if people on both sides are using the tool to do this, who’s really hurt by that?

If your children would just adopt a can-do attitude while they’re mining, they’d be getting promotions

Movie studios: “This is definitely the most important thing we have to deal with right now”

OK, as long as all the well-meaning people stop discussing it, nobody will ever find out about it.

Son, this is not it.

Does IC give you a way to make your own replacement suggestions? I only use Shipt, and it’s built into shipt to preload “if they don’t have that, get this”. Most of the time the shopper is able to complete the whole order without changing anything when the preloaded suggestions are used.

Fuck that. “Content” is what social media CEOs want. It’s the garbage you shovel in front of eyeballs so you can sell those eyeballs to advertisers.

Tell a story. Make something that’s fun. Make me feel something. Don’t create “content”. You aren’t a “content creator”. You’re a person. Make something interesting to other people. Don’t be a CEO’s fucking content monkey.

It’s not that it was the issue. It probably wasn’t, although we’ll never know.

It paints a picture. A bigger picture of carelessness, corner cutting, rushing, and absolute indifference to the lives that depend on this company making its sub work.

And in a larger sense, it paints a picture of the way the wealthy run every aspect of the world now: carelessness, corner cutting, rushing, and absolute indifference to human lives.