Name and shame. From the USA Today article:

Two Republicans, Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Warren Davidson of Ohio, voted with Democrats to immediately halt American hostilities against Iran. Four Democrats bucked their party, guaranteeing the resolution would fail. They were Reps. Jared Golden of Maine, Henry Cuellar of Texas, Greg Landsman of Ohio and Juan Vargas of California.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/03/05/iran-war-powers-vote-house-fails/89000084007/

Not sure if something new is coming out covering the legends, but presumably people aren’t taking issue with things building off known IP, just that most sequels today are cheap cash grabs of objectively lower quality than the original. Most works coming out about Arthurian legends now tend to be a new analysis applied to the existing story, thus introducing new themes and adding layers, not just doing simple mimicry. But maybe I’m not aware of the specific media you’re referring to.

I agree to a certain extent, but also would point out that the longer something exists, the more likely it is to be exploited by capital and then just be objectively worse. A lot of the good things are still there, just pushed aside and hidden by people with ulterior motives. Plenty of queer youth still find a lot of community and comfort online when it’s absent in their lives. There is definitely something to be said about how things shape people vs how people shape things though.

As far as the detect magic thing goes, I think it depends a bit on the individual setting. I’m usually not playing in official WOTC settings, but per the PHB, a single cast of a low level spell can be 10-50 gp. A mercenary is 2 gp a day. Let’s say for whatever reason that a spell caster was willing to take a midrange single spell cast payment for an entire day of work since it’s a prestigious position, you’re still looking at 30gp a day. That’s equivalent to 15 mercenaries. That’s just for a single spell caster who has 10 minutes of a spell that has a range of 30 ft, and can be blocked by the thickness of most castle walls. I don’t know pricing difference for different wizard levels, but let’s just say that you have level 1 wizards cast it as a ritual and have 2 wizards so they are switching off sentry/casting every 10 minutes. They work in shifts, so to be covered 24/7 you’re looking at 3 8-hr shifts for two wizards per shift. So now you’re employing 6 wizards, and you’re still only getting 30 ft at a time. You could station them only in your treasury or whatever other important room, or you could have them walk the grounds on patrol. Unless you’re switching to multiple sets patrolling you still won’t be able to cover the full grounds all at once. At a certain point, security is just security theatre. Locks are a deterrent more than anything, so unless the person under attack is very very wealthy or is actively making high powered enemies, they probably don’t actually need that level of security. I would guess that a place with less than 20 guards would not opt for that level of security. Anti-magic fields are not unheard of, and the above is certainly a thing that can be done, but I don’t think most jails or bandit camps will have that level of security. Probably not even local mayors or city leaders.

If I was running a security heavy coronation or something, maybe the above would be relevant and the wizards would have something conferring invisibility, so the path they take would be unknown and random every time. Maybe they party heard through some rumors of an opening for a wizard position at the castle, though the monarch doesn’t have a court wizard so they’d have a chance to know it’s for security or something secret at least.

It might also be that it’s unfun to make a heist where the shapeshifter is useless for stealth because every inch is covered by detect magic, or even if not every inch it adds unnecessary overhead of “where’s the wizard casting now?” because someone has their familiar watching them anyway. No one is stopping you though, and I could definitely see it being fun to do for a big event.

As far as the guard thing goes, it probably depends on what is being guarded. A bandit camp in the woods will probably be accustomed to lots of animals. Maybe a castle grounds with a garden too. I think unless the location is known to house the Crown Jewels or something, the guards are probably just bored and aren’t on high alert for those kind of things, especially if the PC is passing on stealth/nature checks to act natural. If a guard saw a butterfly in the middle of the castle in a room with no windows, that’s cause for suspicion in a way that just seeing a butterfly outside would not be. Maybe a monarch would have overly zealous guards though.

Most pricing info from roll20: https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Expenses

You are not mistaken. I have them tagged due to that same behavior. Some Lemmy clients allow tagging of users. I know voyager is a popular option that does. You might already know that and just didn’t think their previous comments warranted tagging, but just fyi.

What do you mean steal it? The article makes it clear that the errors are likely the result of AI hallucinations that arose during translation and that accounts that have submitted multiple articles with these errors will be subject to additional review or banning from this program. It seems likely that underpaid people using AI to translate things aren’t paying as much attention to the output as Wikipedia expects.

I know it’s not as fancy as other IDEs, but it is still my go to for anything that I plan to perfect within a week or two. It’s also my go to for txt files. Anyone that is savvy enough for notepad++ could get a lot of use out of it in my opinion.

Yes, I saw that, I just didn’t see them say that’s what happened to them. If that’s what happened then this should be an open and shut case. Like I said initially, Google is a bad company doing bad things and this change was an objectively greedy and evil thing.

I understand mutual aid as a concept, but my local anarchist groups seem happy to just do random mutual aid. They will just stand on a corner, distribute food to anyone that comes by and say “great job team!” It feels ineffectual and the lack of planning really hobbles them. I suggested doing a more organized approach and they were all “you can do that if you want”, which I already knew I could do. I was wondering if WE should maybe be a little more organized and they just aren’t interested. They’ll do a toy drive and then just go to a random park to give them out. It feels more like a random act of kindness group than a group trying to build parallel systems of power. I understand that it may just be my local groups, but I would love to hear about other groups experiences. Is there maybe a more anarchist friendly way of organizing that I’m not privy to? I can do some reading if necessary. I’m not really an anarchist, but I believe mutual aid is important, I’d just like to see it done more purposefully. Is your mutual aid group a chapter of one I’d be familiar with? I’d be interested in trying a different group if it felt more helpful.

Google is a bad company with bad policies, but I’d love to have them explain what caused the compromise. They dispute that it was uploaded publicly to GitHub, but don’t seem to provide any information as to what happened. They also didn’t have 2fa on, which is strange to hear because AWS (they’re using Google) required 2fa on all accounts at least a year ago, regardless of permissions if memory serves. Really sorry to hear this happened to them, and the fact you can’t set a hard cap on spend makes Google the party ultimately responsible here, but I’d appreciate having more information on the actual cause.

I get where you’re coming from, but I think it’s important that ars has held this person accountable. They have a journalistic standard they are sticking to, which is that there should be no AI use, and there are repercussions for people who don’t abide. There’s not an extremely large cohort that is willing to spend more to avoid AI, but I am certainly part of it, and seeing ars hold this person accountable helps me know that I can trust and patronize them ethically. There are businesses out there unwilling to acquiesce to an AI first narrative, and I’m just worried that elements of doomerism are going to make people unwilling to believe those companies when they have every reason to believe them.

Extremely sorry to hear that is happening. For what it’s worth, reports like this are not uncommon now:

https://futurism.com/future-society/deloitte-government-ai-hallucinations

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/oct/06/deloitte-to-pay-money-back-to-albanese-government-after-using-ai-in-440000-report

There’s an assumption that there has been an increased workload requested of them that I don’t have a reason to believe. That person has been a writer for them for years and since they don’t use AI as a rule, I don’t know why they would have increased expected output from their staff. I’m not saying that never happens, I just don’t believe that’s what happened in this case as there is no evidence to suggest that. I appreciate you explaining that comment though.

What was the damned if you don’t in this scenario? Seems more like damned if do, best if you don’t in this situation.

I don’t work at Ars, and maybe you know something I don’t, but I have seen nothing to suggest that they’re one of the companies doing that. It seems like they are pretty open about how they do not allow AI to be used in the process. Have they said something to indicate otherwise and I just misssed it?

Had they narrowed it to just #2 they’d at least have international support. This reads like someone did really poorly in their language class and is hoping toppling the government will allow them to get back at their teacher.

It’s very strange to hear what people think is acceptable on dating apps nowadays. Glad your experience in Spain has been positive. Hope you find the right person.

I don’t want to write an in depth comment without receipts, but I swear I watched a breadtuber deep dive into how he put those women in horrible situations, and they also touched on his personal life. I cannot for the life of me find the video though, but the information I remember is pretty damning. If anyone knows what I’m referring to, please post a link. I’m not trying to dismiss this act if it’s a genuine thing, but I would love to know I’m not hallucinating this video.

Badge info: https://www.scouting.org/merit-badges/citizenship-in-society/

As a woman privy to other women’s dating experiences, I cannot stress enough how the 666 obsessed crowd are just objectively worse partners. Guys who don’t meet it (generally height wise) swear that they just need a foot in the door and dating apps make the girls pickier, and had they met irl they’d do fine. Though that’s often true, most 666 girls have definitely dated outside 666 when picked up by a guy out and about, if I was a guy I think I’d like if they self selected against me. If I was a dude on dating apps 6’-6’3" I’d list 5’11" just to avoid these women. Just because maybe they’d date <6’ if they met someone irl does not erase that they are superficial and judgy. We all have our quirks and maybe they’re ok with some superficiality so long as they get a partner, but these are some of the worst partners I have seen. It’s extremely frustrating to see guys caught up in this. If you’re not enough for them on paper, you’ll never be enough for them, even if they do settle for you. Some guys might be happy with that, so long as they have a partner, but they will just not love you the way someone who does not care about those things will, even if you do meet the criteria. Your perspective is undoubtedly saving you a lot of time dating bad people.