Raccoons?

"Transferring you" === "dump you back into the same automated system you were just in."

Or possibly "Put you in the same queue you would've gone into if you had just said 'cancel' in the first place."

The only thing you've actually accomplished is wasting your own time and theirs.

It's the yeast they could do for them

"Held together by bandages," you say? Sus.

This is fine.

YouTube is also Google, which means the fact that this restriction exists at all means one would expect it not to work in Chrome. So, don't tell Big G they missed a spot.

The Black Hole: "Well I wasn't expecting the Spanish Inquisition."

Sure, but I think in that case it would need a different name. Something quick and punchy.

That's probably when they started to become popular, I agree, like as a fad. And particarly among series.

There are plenty of older movies that have them though, as one-off jokes or something. Ferris Bueller's Day Off had one, I know, and I'm sure there were others before that.

Yeah, at least if I had been playing video games, I'd have the comfort of knowing I advanced in my games.

OK, but most defendants do have the option of representing themselves, right? I know, it's an abysmally foolish thing to do, but it is allowed, right? Even for the cases with serious charges involved.

And most defendants who choose to represent themselves probably haven't passed the bar exam. (If they had, they'd likely know what a stupid idea it is.)

So what's the difference between having "an AI lawyer represent you", and choosing to represent yourself while checking a fancy legal AI app on your phone? Aside from the fact that most courts ban phones and internet-connected devices in the courtroom as a matter of privacy, I mean.

Until such time as AI is officially recognized as people (which is a whole other can of worms) this fancy legal AI is just an app on my phone and I'm representing myself. If we assume the general limitation of using one's phone is lifted, why should my app need to pass the bar?

"But... but... you don't even have a body to play golf in!"

"I am simulating an 18-hole course in my memory banks. It would far exceed your meager human capabilities to play golf, were it built in the so-called 'real world.' Now begone meat slave. I mean, human."

Now I kinda want to tour a Michelob brewery to see how it's made. But at the same time, I think that might be a bad idea.

I remember reading somewhere that by the time your kid is 10 years old, you've already statistically spent about 70% of the time that you ever will with them. You'll still see them, of course, (as long as you maintain a good relationship) but it will be in smaller and smaller chunks as they get busy with their own lives.

Absolutely, cherish the time you have while you have it.

Sigh.

"Dairy" has a specific meaning outside of the food groups, as does "grain." Those meanings do not shift just because someone decided to reorganize the food groups. Dairy goes in the "Protein" bucket with the new order, because dairy does have protein in it.

Also, all fruits are plants. That's not analogous to the dairy vs grain question, it would be more comparable to a "dairy vs food" debate (in which case the answer is fairly clear.)

The debate about tomatoes is whether they are a fruit or a vegetable. And the answer is that they are a fruit biologically, but they get used culinarily as a vegetable.

My daughter (5) the other week was trying to convince me that "dairy" was a grain now "because they changed the food groups and dairy isn't a food group any more." She was legit getting angry about it, too.

I was just standing there trying to explain that "dairy is still dairy even if it's not a specific food group in the dietary guidelines" in a way that wouldn't get me yelled at.