That makes sense. So it’s just an obviously bullshit river crossing puzzle that the chatbot is calling a classic problem.

Can someone explain the origin of this problem for someone ootl?

I don’t think the type that doesn’t like extensions would be likely to use a chromium based browser tho. I suggest saving all your tabs to a text file.

Download one of those tab stash extensions. It might not fix the problem, but it moves it out of the way sufficiently to forget about it.

This is the way

I had not expected chatbots to induce psychosis in this many people. I guess that happens if you believe the lying machine is smarter than you. Don’t think this is what rats envisioned when they said ai would be dangerous tho

Because everyone uses whatsapp. For most there isn’t really an option of not using whatsapp. Though more and more people are switching to signal nowadays, which is good to see.

Already did a#ter reading this post ^ ^

Ah, my apologies, I must’ve missed that.

Which is why we use plural for singular second person, obviously

E: I am not gonna continue this prescriptivist argument any further. There are certainly cases where “they is” is correct, but that does not discount the singular “they are”. This is my stance and remains my stance. You believe whatever you want, have a nice day.

Yeah? The pronoun is what causes it to be plural. This is how the grammar works. I don’t understand what your argument is here.

Transcription: Image of a tweet by pbsnews posted July 11th, 2025. The tweet reads “A State Department employee shared with PBS news an image from inside the department”. The image includes a piece of paper taped to a mirror with the words: ‘colleagues, if you remain, RESIST FASCISM. Remember the oath you vowed to uphold.’" Attached to the tweet is an image, that contains aformentioned piece of paper, taped to a bathroom mirror. The bathroom stalls are visible in its reflection.

Link: https://xcancel.com/NewsHour/status/1943805242543390807

So you would say that when referencing a singular specific person of undeterminate gender in the third person we should use is? Because I am quite sure that, if that has ever been correct at all, it certainly isn’t now. As per merriam webster: A student was found with a knife and a BB gun in their backpack Monday, district spokeswoman Renee Murphy confirmed. The student, whose name has not been released, will be disciplined according to district policies, Murphy said. They also face charges from outside law enforcement, she said.— Olivia Krauth

E: also, “Each member [of the women’s touch football team] found something they could improve on in the future.”

Dalby (Queensland) Herald (Nexis) 21 October 16, 2014 (as quoted in the oxford english dictionary)

Contradicts you as well unless you’d like to argue that “each man are fighting for himself” is correct.

You might want to work on your grammar, my friend.

'Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o’erhear the speech."— Shakespeare, Hamlet (1599);

Caesar: “No, Cleopatra. No man goes to battle to be killed.” Cleopatra: “But they do get killed” —Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra (1901);

In an 1881 letter, Emily Dickinson wrote “Almost anyone under the circumstances would have doubted if [the letter] were theirs, or indeed if they were themself.”

George Eliot (1859) – Adam Bede: “It is too late to spare anyone when they are dead.”

You is not very smart, is you?

Anarchism wants to do away with salaries altogether in most cases. Anarchism is about increasing freedom, meaning the ability for an individual to take the actions they want to take. A part of this is ensuring no person is dying of starvation/living on the street/etc.

That’s not really a valid argument, as wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. But besides that, yes it does?

Anarchism in it’s correct interpretation rejects all hierarchies, be it from the state, white supremacy, the patriarchy or capitalism. Since money is equivalent to power income inequality does inherently imply a hierarchy.

I mean… can you really call it anarchism if you have a n implicit hierarchy? I would say that defeats the point.

We’re on the left. The only anarchism is social anarchism.