That’s what I don’t get about this. The point is either to get out of paying or at least make it very difficult. At the same time the cost to Disney as a company with all the bad press and fall out from doing this would be orders of magnitude greater than simply paying the widower compensation. Who signed off on it? The idea that a lawyer can do what ever it takes to win a case while simultaneously destroying the company they work for seems dumb as shit from a purely financial point of view.

Who thinks like this? And why? Tbh I don’t really care why

Who cares that’s ages away /s

I think it’s why he drifted right. He couldn’t handle being called out on his bullshit so he needed to find a group of people who wouldn’t question him

As someone who knows nothing about this stuff, yes.

So they’re not changing names? The headline says they voted to do it, then it kind of says later that the vote failed?

deleted by creator

Do you remember if you got an answer?

To be fair it really wasn’t that loud

Probably written by ChatGPT

With a vengeance

Libertarians assemble!

My guacamole futures just went through the roof

Poorly built rocket

He’d keep telling you it’s nearly ready but you have already been waiting for hours.

deleted by creator

I didn’t no but I gathered that. What I meant was that in the past the images that would have appeared in the documentary would have simply been photoshopped - it’s the deception that the images were real that is the problem. This article, I assume is using the topic of ai to imply something new has happened when it hasn’t

It’s Netflix marketing with ai. If this happened in the past it would just be photoshopped. They’re using buzzwords to get you engaged

deleted by creator

Can you use the beakers and scientific equipment to mix the two?