Yes, the question itself is too simplistic for a meaningful answer without lots of conditions and qualifications. It just invites highly polarized apples vs oranges arguments.
LovableSidekick
Except not. Still nice to see any TNG or Community reference tho.
Doesn't matter that you waited... you're here now. Congrats!
"Don't call me Shirley!"
TIL Jenna Fischer, known as Pam in The Office, is not related to this guy. Or to Gus Fischer, a guy I knew in high school.
Good antidote: play Superfreak in your head.
Drawback: now you have Superfreak playing in your head.
Minor flex, I'm actually pretty good at solving these without any letters. It used to drive my parents crazy. Not much use unless you are able to get on that show.
No I didn't look at phone use, but who has? The underlying point is really that when people are screaming about a reason something is horrible, and they're confronted with the information that something they personally do is in the same ballpark (and has been for decades), how should they respond? With a little self examination? Question their own priorities slightly? Apparently not. Just insults, denial, and debate-club bullshit. Like their favorite entertainment is sacred. It's exactly how the business world responded to climate change - deny, deflect, disengage. Very disingenuous.
Sounds like an argument that would take at least two meetings and a dozen emails if this were done by a company lol.
I'm just looking at lemmy.world in a web browser - does that count?
I would expect that an AI designed to be a life coach would be trained on a lot of human interaction about moods and feelings, so its responses would simulate picking up emotional clues. That's assuming the designers were competent.
In the most absolute historical sense all borders are arbitrary made-up lines on the ground.