I like pineapple pizza (as long as the pineapple pieces aren’t too big), but that burger sounds annoying. Not saying the flavors don’t combine well, but the amount of toppings makes it sound way too tall unless the slices are razor thin.

I don’t think AI is really the issue here, people were flooding the internet with shitty, badly-sourced articles long before LLMs.

Wish it was ordered chronologically. Also, Old Fashioned being from 1880? Really? It’s called ‘Old Fashioned’ because it used to be the drink that the word ‘cocktail’ was invented for in the early 1800s!

Depends on how long I’m inside, how dark the store is and how much of a fuck I give on a given day. I do think that most people think it’s rude/douchey/etc., but I’m not convinced that I should care about that kind of moralizing of etiquette (though I do care, to various degrees, what people think of me).

It’s somewhat harder to see inside with sunglasses, but I, too, wear prescription glasses so it’s a bit of a hassle to change to normal glasses.

Which country?

That doesn’t really answer the question though, you just assumed that attackers would instantly figure out your system with a sample size of 1. How do they do that? Not saying that they definitely can’t, but I want to see logical arguments before I believe it.

I doubt it can figure out whether a password system is secure. I’d be surprised if “leumSWydThIThBaPl!690720” didn’t get a decent score, though.

On one hand, it’s probably not that unlikely that an attacker gets 3 samples if the email or username gets reused a lot, on the other hand I wonder how well automated password crackers deal with systems like this. ‘one good pattern with a couple of extra characters per site’ seems like a pretty common password system.

most humans were conceived unintentionally

I’d assume that most people who are married (marriage is a pretty old and widespread institution, even if the details differ between cultures) expect at least some children, even if they don’t have much control about the exact times and numbers.

Wearing that getup in freakin’ Iraq must have been miserable.

That’s not how science fiction works.

Just because they don’t treat it like it’s advanced, doesn’t mean it isn’t advanced from our, the audience’s, perspective. Most tech in most sci-fi works is treated as a fact of life, no one goes “holy shit, they just invented hovercars!”.

It’s still high tech if it’s vastly beyond our current technological ability.

Why wouldn’t it work? Stories usually fail because the plot is bad or because they’re badly told, and it’s not that hard to maintain verisimilitude just because seemingly opposite ideas like magic and advanced technology are combined - just communicate what your magic and technology can and cannot do in broad strokes and stick to it, and avoid asspulls that make no sense and/or undermine the character beats you’re showing. But you get exactly the same issues in a story with only magic or only advanced technology.

30 years is pretty old for a movie.