It is a lot more complex than “Europe is actually following America more than China in this”.

Europe have very limited lithium deposits compared to China. Europe is trying to be as self sustaining as possible, especially now that the US have shown themselves to be a highly unreliable partner.

So exchanging one dependency for another is a poor lateral move at best.

You can’t just start digging up the entire ground and make car batteries out of all lithium you find.

European universities all over are researching alternative battery technology that doesn’t rely as much on lithium.

There’s this really neat thing called nuclear reactors that produce an enormous amount of energy. It’s only been around for ~70 years but they look promising.

"I didn’t expect this,” Jesse Weldon said.

Why would you Jesse? The only thing that would be more disturbing than a kid shooting their parent, is if you as an outsider expected it might happen.

It is FAR more difficult, both physically and emotionally to kill someone with a knife than a firearm.

There are millions, if not a billion of kids in the world. And I’m willing to bet, that over the past 100 years. Homicides committed by kids, are heavily skewed towards gunfire over stabbings. Even if we exclude child-soldiers.

I would even wager that homicides by kids with guns in the US, far outweighs homicides by kids with knives, world wide.

This has to be the hundredth time I’m saying this. But no. What you are wishing for the prosecutor’s to do, is not only illegal, but highly unethical. We’re talking disbarred levels of unethical.

The right course of action is what they were doing. Resign. Make headlines. Bring attention. And if the government want to shoot themselves in the foot and fire you without cause because you wished to resign. Well, I’m sure they’re wiping their tears with their separation pay package.

Win win.

They did have something to replace slavery with…

If you sail a boat across the Atlantic, you’ll find lots of countries that also have the concept of police. Yet… their police don’t run around shooting people all the time.

How is that even possible?

If hating every single instance of CSAM regardless of victimhood makes me weird. Then I’m gladly weird.

Yes. They are both the worst of the worst. I place both in the very bottom of Dantes inferno.

Or do you still struggle to understand what that means?

Ok. You’re right. You saying it’s ok to depict CSAM if there isn’t a victim is not you arguing the opposite. It’s me lying.

You’re so smart. Good job.

That’s not what I said. How are you this stupid?

I said I think they are both, equally morally reprehensible. They both belong in the very bottom of Dante’s inferno.

What exactly have I lied about?

I’ve never once tried to even insinuate that what grok is doing ok. Nor that it should be. What I’ve said. Is that it doesn’t even matter if there are an actual real person being victimized or not. It’s still illegal. No matter how you look at it. It’s illegal. Fictional or not.

Your example of Bart in the Simpsons movie is so far out of place I hardly know where to begin.

It’s NOT because he’s fictional. Because fictional depictions of naked children in sexually compromised situations IS illegal.

Though I am glad you don’t have a dog. It would be real awkward for the dog to always be the smartest being in the house.

Talking about morals and morality is how you end up getting things like abortion banned. Because some people felt morally superior and wanted to enforce their superior morality on everyone else.

There’s no point in bringing it up. If you need to bring up morals to argue your point. You’ve already failed.

But please do enlighten me. Because personally. I don’t think there’s a moral difference between depicting “victimless” CSAM and CSAM containing a real person.

I think they’re both, morally, equally awful.

But you said there’s a major moral difference? For you maybe.

It doesn’t matter if there’s a victim or not. It’s the depiction of CSA that is illegal.

So no, talking about whatever or not there’s a victim is not the most important part.

It doesn’t matter if you draw it by hand with crayons. If it’s depicting CSA it’s illegal.

Yes, it certainly comes across as you arguing for the opposite since you above, reiterated

The real thing to talk about is the presence or absence of a victim.

Which has never been an issue. It has never mattered in CSAM if it’s fictional or not. It’s the depiction that is illegal.

The real thing to talk about is the presence or absence of a victim.

Dude, you’re just wrong. There seems to be a huge disconnect with you between what the law is. And what you want the law to be.

You are not allowed to take an image of someone, photoshop them naked, and distributed it. Period.

You are also not allowed to depict child sexual abuse. It doesn’t matter if it’s not real. It’s the depiction of CSA taking place that is illegal.

That is a lot of text for someone that couldn’t even be bothered to read the first paragraph of the article.

Grok has the ability to take photos of real people, including minors, and produce images of them undressed or in otherwise sexually compromising positions, flooding the site with such content.

There ARE victims, lots of them.

I know you think you’re being very clever by creating a strawman and ridiculing said strawman, but everyone sees right through that and just rolls their eyes.

Horses have it far better than most wild animals. It’s not even close. You’re either underestimating the living conditions of most Horses, or overestimating the living conditions of most wild animals. Probably both.

As far as I’m concerned, “threatening” to use your own body in an attempt to raise antibiotic resistant bacteria, is self harm.

You don’t have to agree. That’s fine.

Yeah. So we agree that she’s threatening self harm (minimum) to solicit a response from someone. Emotional manipulation.

I’m glad we managed to argue our way to what we already concluded from the start.