Anyway turns out this site does an ok job of showing the status of a bill and what each stage means: https://bills.parliament.uk/
...although here it shows the CHIS bill as still being in third reading, even though when I click on that I can see it passed that stage yesterday: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/2783
Been casually following the news about these "overseas operations" and "covert human intelligence sources" bills that are in parliament atm, I've been annoyed at the coverage since it mostly seems to focus on one or two people's reactions to the bill's progress... without like, explaining what stage the bill is at, or what that means, which seems way more important to me.
Kind of reminds me of being at school and spending a lesson writing down everything that was dictated by our teacher, and at the end not remembering any of it (not a good thing in this case I guess lol)
One thing I find interesting about using the web is that over the years I (and I assume everyone else) have developed an intuition for what content on a page is spam, such that I can ignore it without registering it. Like I can go on a streaming site and instantly play the actual video among dozens of fake "play now" buttons. Or dismiss a load of pop-ups without registering the content whatsoever.
And how if I was using the web for the first time this probably would not be intuitive at all.
Lol at these pictures of the Kent lorry park that's being built as a consequence of our "red-tape cutting" brexit.
I think a good scary movie would have:
- minimal gore
- minimal "jump-scares"
- minimal use of "scary" music
- zero dumb characters
As these all feel like cheap tricks
Anyway, zero respect for people who make these arguments
People who stand up for good causes but don't win are not the ones making the world worse; ultimately you're just shaming people for trying; this is such a basic, sesame-street level observation, but is nonetheless true and is not incompatible with being as cynical and realpolitik as you like imo. And yet I continue to see it in supposedly adult media.
This is especially sus when the person in question is the only one offering a qualitatively different proposition to the mainstream.
And imo it's fine to say, "I don't think so and so will win because of x,y,z, so I want to replace them".
But saying people should be "ashamed", they "failed" certain groups, they "let them down", because they didn't win seems bad.
Feel like there's something really childish, if not outright dishonest, about criticising politicians/activists on a personal level because you don't believe they're effective.
I'm not talking about if you think they're deliberately failing and presenting a false opposition, obviously that's bad. Or the kind of minor peer-to-peer shaming everyone does when someone is failing to meet a standard that they could.
Nvidia just replaced video codecs with a neural network.
This is pretty mind-blowing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqmMnjJ6GEg
I don't even wanna think about further implications like faked recordings, online impersonation or the impact on Hollywood productions.
Ransomware for your penis
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!