Wandering Adventure Party

@0x4d6165 @alice but we grant asylum claims for LGBTQ+ folk from other parts of the world on the basis that they would face persecution if they returned.
(Admittedly I don't think any US state is executing people for queerness)

@phl @alice I've always assumed it's because it would be diplomatically awkward to do otherwise.

@Fruan @alice that would conflict with "We can always tell". Not that logical consistency is always a requirement with this lot, I'll admit.

@alice ....and yet European countries still (so far as I understand it) refuse asylum claims on the basis that "The USA is a Safe Country".

First US court case *that I am aware of* to set precedent that LLM output is not 1st-amendment protected speech, and that the operators of said LLM are therefore not protected from the consequences of said output - in this case resulting in a kid's suicide.

IANAL, but it feels like this might be an important issue.

Judge Rejects Claim AI Chatbots Protected By First Amendment in Teen Suicide Lawsuit - Slashdot

A U.S. federal judge has decided that free-speech protections in the First Amendment "don't shield an AI company from a lawsuit," reports Legal Newsline. The suit is against Character.AI (a company reportedly valued at $1 billion with 20 million users) Judge Anne C. Conway of the Middle District...

(yro.slashdot.org)