Jump to content

Tuco

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3532
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

6016 Surly 1%

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm guessing Trump doesn't like the Vindman twins. For those who don't recall, Alexander had testified to Congress leading up to Trump's first impeachment regarding his blackmail of Zelensky. Eugene was on the NSC and had forwarded the "perfect phone call" transcript to White House lawyers. It is entirely possible he will be involved in the third impeachment of Trump, if the Dems can take the House in 26. I knew Eugene was running in 24, but didn't realized he won. I wasn't reading much news in the election aftermath.
  2. My guess is the House version was pretty broad, without much in the way of cutouts. That is probably why he wanted the amendments - something to give the Administration some flexibility in what they released. I just think it's funny he voted for something he didn't want to become law.
  3. Omaha Public Power District just announced they expect a 5-9% increase on rates, per year, through the end of the decade. No mention of the Facebook and Google data centers recently developed in the service area in the release.
  4. We import fertilizer? I figured the domestic production of bullshit would have been more than sufficient.
  5. My former Congressman (Don Bacon, NE-2) once explained at a town hall that people should negotiate their health plan with their employer. It was met with laughter and boos. He seemed surprised when people explained to him that's not how it works. The dude went from the Air Force to Congress and had never worked for a private-sector employer. He is reasonably intelligent, but has zero fucking concept what reality is for 95% of Americans. He just votes how he is told to vote.
  6. I'm starting to think it's a risky strategy to select federal prosecutors based on cup size.
  7. Back to the Loreal thing, I can actually see a decent tie-in for AI and make-up. "ChatLipstick, recommend a make-up scheme that makes me look kind of like Emma Stone in Poor Things"..."Use this base, with that eyeliner, and that lipstick, and take your top off...here is a picture of what you will look like." It's basically what women have been doing for women for decades. But, two things: 1) Will customers still want to have that interaction, and that tactile experience having someone else apply it; 2) is it worth the money? How much is someone willing to pay for it? $5 maybe? $20? That won't justify the investment.
  8. Putting lipstick on a pig?
  9. it was the "off duty" part that got him in trouble. The union was pissed he was doing it for free.
  10. He claims he was running through X and the algorithm had the "racy pics." I don't have X so I don't know if that looks like the interface. But I did like this line: “I must’ve looked at more than 1,000 posts,” he said, adding “If i see a picture of a woman, might I look at it longer than a sunset? Yeah.”
  11. Honestly, it looks more like I would expect a dating/prostitution site would look like: pictures of scantily-dressed young women with information along the side. Maybe picking out his date for wherever he is flying to. But it's also possible he is researching AI fakes or on-line prostitution rings. Who the fuck knows. Generally Congressmen are better at covering their tracks.
  12. Fully clothed porn?
  13. Income is also a factor there. Income has probably increased enough to offset inflation...for people making more than 500k per year.
×
×
  • Create New...