In the case of trash collection, the fine has been put in place by the trash-collection corporations. How that specifically may analogize to household-chore robots: I’m not sure. There are possibilities, but picking one among many and saying it will certainly be that one seems likely to be like gambling. Perhaps the robotic company requires you to sign an end-user agreement with lots of fine-print legalese.

I’m making what is called an analogy.

What reason would the governments have …?

The motive is money, but I didn’t say anything about governments, that was your interpretation, and I’ll admit it is a possibility. These robots are said to be AI, and I’d be very surprised if they don’t also have wireless communications of some kind, but to whom and whether those communications can be hacked are all unknowns.

In California, decades ago we used to be able to throw away our household trash in one container. Now we have 3 containers, and it’s recently become a fine-profit center: if folks don’t properly separate their recycling, greenery, and trash components, the AI-surveillance cameras mounted on the trucks will catch it and fine the subscriber (never mind that these trash-recycling-greenery containers are unlocked and on the street where anyone can open and toss something in). In similar fashion, if society adopts robots for household chores, how long until household inspections are held to fine people (as a profit center) who don’t keep their homes sufficiently neat?

While it may not work well for everyone, this is my solution: How To Make Pizza Hut’s Pan Pizza At Home | Allrecipes - YouTube

I’m not in Texas, but was leaving Costco a few days ago, and on the busy street corner adjoining their parking lot there was a guy with a sign that said something like “God hates transgender” and “transgender is evil” and on his sign was a cross. I’ve been thinking about it for a few days and realized there was no “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”

Text of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

It has always bothered me that the First Amendment says nothing about the Executive Branch doing these things (such as via Executive Order), only Congress.

Curious they’re suing the NYTimes instead of the various interviewees.

This morning I watched a video posted on Lemmy about a guy getting a ticket for smoking cannabis in public, I believe in Hollywood. Yet, the GOP congress refuses to “ticket” Trump for his war on Iran. We have a massive difference in how laws are implemented and to whom they are applied. Why would extinction of this inequality be a bad thing?

The plutocrats’ war on the poor. Make America Great Again?

According to the story, they figured it out after they’d put him in a vehicle and were going somewhere.

It’s a feature, not a bug?

Beating down on kids is so human.

I understand the article topic is enforced sanctions on third parties. That however was not quite what I was getting at, as my question was about two parties, a buyer and a seller. An atheist entity and a religious entity. Also, I note you didn’t answer my question about the source of your atheism quote.

Atheism is when you accept collective punishment of religious people

What is the source of your quote? Refusing to buy something from a seller is punishment of the seller?

It’s mildly fascinating that an officially atheist country is willing to make big purchases from a theocracy.

Why have human slaves or serfs if robots do everything a human does with fewer mistakes, and no need for sleep or recreation?

Perhaps China has the right idea. AI cannot replace human jobs. Or perhaps government could make Basic income a perpetual reality?

Article moves from talking about anti-woke being racist, to the US military not refusing illegal orders and the danger of nuclear weapon use. Scary times when the right-wing gets near unanimous control (Legislative, Executive, and Judicial) of the levers of US government power.

These compounds, prized for their potential health benefits, were hidden among a rich mix of plant chemicals that vary dramatically even between just a few strains.

There’s at least part of the motive for US Congress to have outlawed cannabis seeds. It seems they want certain strains for Big Pharma drugs.

deleted by creator