The attacks on him were dubious at best.
Well, this article is at least in part about the effect if deep fakes on women in politics.
I'm not convinced this will be as big of a problem for national security as suggested. Pornographic images can't be broadcast and can't be shared on Facebook. Twitter can already label deep fakes iirc. The focus on…
This is the best argument for this change.
No, it doesn't affect anyone. It's a perfectly legitimate use of the word.
This change does no good, it serves only to allow people to virtue signal.
Do we really have to examine the origin of every word we use rather than according its modern common usage and use in context?
>I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. How does this make anything more accessible for anyone?
The attacks on him were dubious at best.
Well, this article is at least in part about the effect if deep fakes on women in politics.
I'm not convinced this will be as big of a problem for national security as suggested. Pornographic images can't be broadcast and can't be shared on Facebook. Twitter can already label deep fakes iirc. The focus on…
This is the best argument for this change.
No, it doesn't affect anyone. It's a perfectly legitimate use of the word.
This change does no good, it serves only to allow people to virtue signal.
Do we really have to examine the origin of every word we use rather than according its modern common usage and use in context?
>I for one think it's great that people are willing to make things a little more accessible for more people. How does this make anything more accessible for anyone?