The definition of success in war is did you achieve your objectives. The years of the US claiming the War of 1812 was a tie is a long running joke for Canadians. You can't use the Johnny Horton song for the illegal invasion of New Orleans 15 days after the peace treaty as a win.

No, the War of 1812 was a war of invasion and the US spectacularly failed. Yes, they burned York, killing their commander in the process. They were massacred at Queenston Heights, pushed out of Upper Canada, and lost multiple battles.

There was a great story by LMM doing the new Mary Poppins when he was talking to Dick about having some issues figuring out his steps for a scene and Dick watched the chorographer once and then walked him through the steps flawlessly the first time.

I do not understand why no one is talking about how much money is going to suddenly be missing from the consumer economy in starting in January. This is one of my...Am I Crazy....moments. Money sunk into higher insurance payments will not be spent on consumer goods, and this will happen quickly.

I just a DM about this, to clarify, it means who ever wins the primary is the best candidate, regardless of who it is.

Short response. Crockett and Talarico are good candidates. But if you can't convince your party you're the best option, you'll never convince the general electorate you are.

There were also concerns that Tyson (who at the time of development was still the heavyweight champion) and WBA–WBC–IBF might sue. Ironic because by the time the game hit the arcades, Tyson has been defeated and a year later was battling sexual assault charges, tanking the value of his name.

Good ol' Susie Trump. Our boy was in fine form at that casino. drawing slightly less than 'Slippery When Wet', the Bon Jovi cover band.

I see John Del Arroz hasn't changed from his days of harassing people at Worldcon, like a sad trollish Peter Pan, who will never grow up.

I recommend this cover: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vjuf...

You will be visited by three spirits.

So I'm not surprised businesses aren't getting much value out of it, because below the executive level, no one else has the time to waste to assemble and curate the data necessary to get something better than a vastly broad aggregate response, even if the prompts are detailed and limited.

You're writing for X person who happens to work in that industry, and the aggregate nature can only contain the vast variances if it is specifically directed to access and use that content if made available. Curation, more than ever, is the key to effective use.

That's why it is so easy at times to tell AI output because it generally lacks consistent tone, internal understanding of value, and fails to align to a client. The whole 'write me a pitch tailored to the oil and gas industry' won't work, because you're not writing for the oil and gas industry.

However, I have discovered useful applications for it. Found areas in which its automations provide useful service. But more and more, to get any kind of reliable output, I'm discovering that a limited and curated source library is utterly essential. The aggregate nature of the output is the issue.

What I am finding is that, in general, the use of AI is misaligned with its strengths. I am still learning and no where near anything beyond basic competence with it, but its limitations are already easy to gauge and in testing, I've found numerous ways to break it - a key way to understand it.

In order to future proof my position, I'm in the process of a cascade of new classes and training on using AI, angling to be the inhouse expert. While I loathe AI in the general sense, I have experience with older versions of LLMs and aggregator models from various failed RFP engines.

Hey, Suzie Wiles says he's going to go out and campaign all over the country like 2024, so, you know, there's that.

The Olympics are going to be an all out farce.