So TL:DR, chrome is like internet explorer was before firefox. It does some things outside the standard, and because it’s the modern day “default”. sites sloppily code to work with it, and other browsers are left carrying the bag because if tiktok doesn’t work on firefox, people will view that as a firefox problem. Even if firefox is the one actually following the standards when tiktok and chrome aren’t.

I mean what’s the arguement here, that an anti-canal group is trying to hire crisis actors to pretend they have a dead loved one? That the mob is doing hits and throwing them in the canal and making it look like an accident?

I mean, “rich kids” itself is kind of just an extension of what they are allowed to have, and what is officially considered their possesions. I think biological vs step is a meaningless extension. Say you are one of Elon Musks huge wave of kids, you are as rich as whatever payoffs he gave the mother, provided the mother actually spends it on you. Or one of the russian hookers or whatever the heck gates was up to you may very well be poor as hell.

You can have rich parents that you stay with, but they spend less on you than your average barely making ends meet family.

Honestly to me I’d actually want, smart glasses in a form where I can actually control every bit of the data etc… (though I can also see the problem of others having it.

Same vein that I like having security cameras around my yard, that I can access from anywhere. BUT big caveat… I don’t use any of their built in networking, actually my router only gives them local internet access just in case the camera manufacturers did something shady, they only connect to my frigate system.

Something like glasses and AI I pretty much feel the same way. Something like glasses that record, and an AI that indexes all the information, alllows me to go to a computer and say “did john smith ever tell me his birthday”. and be able to discover that even for in person conversations would be an insane QOL tool. But only even remotely worth considering if that data isn’t going to every other company.

I’d say for the same reason we had actually hovering hoverboards in 2015 in back to the future?

agreed there, though where I’d say further it’s about rules internal consistency as well. IE obviously just about every fictional monster has a complete disregard of science, though some more than others can stick to the rules set out in the fictional world.

Answer to all those questions is that they’re magical fictional creatures.

I mean there is that, but at least to some extent fiction has rules, though it’s worth pointing out most broadly, that’s the issue with popular frequently re-imagined things, as every lore has it’s own complete seperate set of rules. Rules are added, removed, changed etc… for every re-interpretation. Zombies could be cursed, magical or maybe semi-realistic scientific explanation. Same problem if you try and explain vampires, as obviously the classic lore they need to be invited in, can be defended from by throwing rice on the ground, cannot cross running water, weak to sun, can’t have reflections, only killable with a wooden stake, or supernaturals vampires that can only be decapitated and lack most of those weaknesses, or twilight where the sun makes them glittery.

I mean I thought putting the first statement of “lol, lets use AI to get an opinion of how good AI is at reducing shootings”.

so yeah the joke I was intending to do was to point out that, if someone asked AI if it was good at stopping school shootings, AI would tell you it isn’t. Which makes it ironic that someone who claims that they trust AI in important roles, can’t seem to trust AI telling it it’s not good at those things (or at least not ask it).

lol, lets use AI to get an opinion of how good AI is at reducing shootings

what direction is the trend going in school shootings in the united states, more or less frequent over time?

The long-term trend in the United States is that school shootings have become more frequent overall, especially since the late 2010s and during/after the COVID-era years. Multiple major datasets and studies show a substantial upward trend over the past 25 years.

A few important nuances:

The exact numbers vary depending on the definition used: Some databases count any gunfire on school property (including after-hours incidents, accidental discharges, gang-related events, etc.). Others count only targeted attacks or mass-casualty events. Even with different definitions, most datasets still show an increase over time.

Some notable findings from recent research:

A study in the journal American Academy of Pediatrics found that the 2017–2022 school years had dramatically more school shootings than the previous two decades, with 2021–2022 reaching the highest level in their dataset.

KFF reported that student exposure to school shootings has nearly tripled since 1999, with the sharpest increases occurring during the pandemic years.

The broad K-12 School Shooting Database showed a peak around 2023, though 2024 and 2025 appear to have declined somewhat from that peak.

So the short version is:

Over decades: upward trend (more frequent). Very recently: there are signs of a modest decline from the post-pandemic peak, but rates remain historically high compared with the 1990s or early 2000s. how likely is it that the use in AI is reducing school shootings?

There’s currently no strong evidence that AI is already reducing school shootings in a measurable national way. The honest answer is that researchers are still in the “possible tool, unproven impact” stage.

What does seem plausible is that AI may help in a few narrow areas:

identifying threatening posts or communications, assisting school threat-assessment teams, sorting large amounts of tips or reports, flagging patterns humans might miss.

Researchers studying threat assessment think technology-assisted systems could potentially help identify credible threats earlier.

There’s also evidence that many attackers show warning signs beforehand — threats, writings, online posts, or concerning behavior — which is exactly the sort of pattern-detection task AI is often good at. One review noted that roughly 75–80% of school shooters communicated intent before attacks.

But there are major caveats:

Experts repeatedly say school shootings are rare and difficult to predict accurately. False positives are a huge problem — you do not want systems incorrectly flagging ordinary students. Many AI school-safety technologies (facial recognition, social-media scanning, behavior monitoring) have little rigorous evidence proving they actually prevent shootings.

Some researchers warn AI systems may introduce bias or over-policing concerns.

And there’s another side to this:

AI may also be creating new risks. Recent investigations and studies suggest some chatbots can, under certain circumstances, provide harmful or violent planning information despite safety guardrails.

So overall, the current evidence points to:

Potential modest preventive benefit through threat assessment and monitoring, but no demonstrated large-scale reduction in school shootings yet, and possibly some offsetting harms from unsafe AI behavior.

If you want, I can also break down:

which anti-shooting methods currently have the strongest evidence, whether armed guards actually reduce shootings, or how “threat assessment” programs statistically perform compared to other approaches.

I mean there’s probably a pretty large aspect of slow storage that’s far more ideal for archiving/backup options, as LLMs are really only interested in the fastest of things.

It’s a lot of land, and a lot of oil. Just because it’s the same country doesn’t make it easy

I mean obviously they are portreyed as good in fiction, hence the long list of examples.

as far as the answer, that’s the universal problem with mixed world mixed stregnth superheros to begin with. Same problem why the green arrow can still be dealing with non powered regular schmos with the flash and superman in their universe able to literally reach the city in seconds and deal with all the problems.

Which makes sense, as long as you haven’t said it was absolutely perfect I wouldn’t change a thing.

It’s like watching the primary for the 2016 presidential election. The one time trump was able to be largely honest, (Mainly because all of his opponents had hugely obvious horrible things about them that they never would have spoken of, and even the democrats wouldn’t have said just because of formalities. Of course he realized very quickly after that bald face lies are actually a lot easier

That’s why I threw the caveat there “unless you can physically walk to where they handmake it”, but of course depends what you want and if you live anywhere near somewhere that does it.

I think the key point here is. sadly the glut of the world right now, plus AI video etc… Point is if you try and buy something “handmade” from the internet, You’ll find a lot of mixed quality AI generated videos of people pretending to make the stuff, plus even if they didn’t AI generate the video, they may have just gotten or filmed one person making something similar to what they dropship once. (you can probably tell once you get it, but you’ll probably have to buy 5 counterfiets before you find a real one, unless you can physically walk to where they handmake it and see them make it.

Well yes but they obviously can and do pretend to be handmade. Worse yet they make AI videos of a person making a product, that looks similar to, and probably significantly better than the dropshipped mass produced crap that they actually ship out.

I mean it’s hollywoods wet dream. They constantly treat actors and writers like sh*t. leading to big strikes and sudden degrades in quality on the shows etc…

top it off actors are, well literally the face of their products. If Scarlet Johanson gets angry and goes on the interview circuit, people listen, No one gives a sh*t what Bob Iger has to say. I think hollywood execs would be happy to see the average quality of movies go way down, in exchange for 100% control of the face of the movies.

and that’s going to be the key strategy as well. Point is if EVERYTHING gets bad at the same time, people just accept it and pick the least bad option. Long as no studio can afford to make high quality acted movies… people will go see the new crap. Especially as they’ve transitioned everything to focus on IP rather than actors.

I know that, I’m just saying, this might generate less of them than the humans currently doing it by eyeball.

You know… this would be scary if the current system weren’t scarier. Glasses that misidentify even 70% of the time, may be significantly better than ice agents arresting everyone with a brownish skin color.