Not to worry! And thank you for this civilized exchange that managed to stay clear of Godwin's Law:)
FriendOfDeSoto
joined 2 years ago
Does a nation cease to exist after it is conquered? All the efforts to that effect by the English notwithstanding, it's still there.
[Angry Welsh noise, probably involving a lot of consonants and a few double L's]
We should not start accepting manipulated images as a replacement for real images
My point was that it is already too late for that. I understand how your feel. I also think that you'll be part of a minority.
There is no such thing as a real image.
[Redacted], [redacted], or maybe [redacted]. We would all benefit if we just didn't hear from him ever again and then his name or title really don't matter.
It was Samsung and they were just ahead of the time. Consider that in the field of photography we've gone from a photograph being a big and often expensive black and white deal to snapping pictures willy nilly on a device everybody carries around in their pockets. We had already accepted retouching of photos even before Photoshop. Photoshop or similar applications are now also available to more people on the same devices they carry around to snap ask these pictures. Photographs today are an artifice of human intervention and/or computer processing. No image is just what happened. The RAW data has probably been heavily edited by the photographer to get the final effect they wanted. Even before so-called AI they have gone in and changed shit around. And they've become so masterful at it that most of us cannot tell the difference. They have probably, on occasion, replaced a whole sky or the moon on shots before they ended up in a brochure. This is nothing new. So if these tricks get automated now, that shows me more how widespread they already were. And I think we are not talking about this as much because we as a society like being cheated like that because it looks good.
Machine learning is so good now that it can ID your face as a baby as well. Not always, but with enough pictures you'll reach statistical certainty.
Other than that you could maybe test DNAs. On a less invasive level, if you know your blood type, you could ask your parents for theirs and see if that makes sense.
Has anyone ever doubted their parents are their parents? Most teenagers about their biological parents during puberty.
Is it possible that you were abducted after running away? Yes. Is it very likely? No. These cases are rare but get lots of news coverage.
If you're under 40, the lack of pictures of your childhood could be conspicuous. Most parents document the progress of their kids and after the advent of digital photography there should be lots of evidence to put your mind at ease.
Your wife made the decision for you collectively not break off the relationships all together. I understand that you don't like it. The adage that blood is thicker than water applies here on top of any other concern. And that's why I would tread carefully in the interest of your marriage. Another folk wisdom is that morals are something you need to be able to afford. And my guess is you will not be able to do so here in the way you would prefer. While her family is at your house, you mustn't tolerate any bullshit and you should be free to express your dismay at the protofascist state of affairs. But I would keep it at a non-shouting, non-hostile level. Your wife has spent your morals money. Try to look at it as an opportunity to change minds. If they are at your house they cannot run away, you have a semi-captive audience, in which you can sow the seeds of doubt. If there is to be another election, this is better than a clean cut, breaking off contact, and entrenching opinions out of spite on their side. Grit your teeth and roll up that rock, Sisyphus. Calm arguments and facts, tackle the ball not the player. And find a way to channel your frustration elsewhere (punching bag in the garage, walk the dog, friendly ear that maybe isn't your wife's, etc.).
On a list of priorities, having a ballroom for state dinners and what not would not be high on mine. But as a big government whose reputation 47 hasn't ruined entirely (yet), I can see the usefulness of a dedicated ballroom for these functions. He is all about appearances and little to no substance behind it. Some government functions are like that, even when the people running it have decidedly more substance behind it than this shriveled mandarin. I would have looked at a gazillion other issues first if I were him but I also take pride in not being him or being similar to him in any way. So let him have his silly ballroom. The construction of which will reveal either that they cooked the numbers or [clasping pearls] it was built by immigrants without the proper visa. You can rename it the Obama ballroom or something when he's gone (eventually/hopefully) and I suspect you can pawn the gold leaf from the walls to help reduce the budget gap he'll undoubtedly leave behind.
As I said, I'm really just making it up.
I'm afraid that pedophilia is prevalent everywhere. We only hear about the rich people more because journalists take an interest and rich people think - not unjustifiably - that money is a good protective shield and therefore take more risks.
In this hypothetical scenario, if all these people were pedophiles or turned a blind eye to it, were assembled at the same time, and all punched their ticket to a delightfully shitty afterlife, I don't think the problem would be gone. There will be willing successors standing by to fill all of these positions. And it would be a stroke of luck if the waiting successors were suddenly more moral beings.