It pains me to argue this point, but are you sure there isn't a legitimate use case just this once? The text says that this was aimed at making Wikipedia more accessible to less advanced readers, like (I assume) people whose first language is not English. Judging by the screenshot they're also being fully transparent about it. I don't know if this is actually a good idea but it seems the least objectionable use of generative AI I've seen so far.
It doesn't scan. But it's not bothering me. Nope not at all. Not in any way annoyed by the fact that there's one too many syllables in the second verse line. Only a complete pedant would get HUNG UP ON THAT RIGHT HAHAHAHAHA
That's a personal choice and I suppose we could be friends anyways, I mean dancing isn't really a fundamental criterion as far as choosing friends is concerned, but right this moment we're going dancing so I don't think your friends would enjoy it being as they don't dance unless I guess they just want to enjoy the music that would be perfectly fine
What happened with that change to signage laws that was going to require tens of millions of dollars to update eg "Canadian Tire" to "Magasin Canadian Tire" and whatnot?
For those experiencing the same confusion as myself: those are not sources for the orphan/survivor benefits story, they're possible reasons why the media might not be reporting the story.
It's actually kind of worrisome that they have to guess it was his code based on the function/method name. Do these people not use version control? I guess not, they sure as hell don't do code reviews if this guy managed to get this code into production
So this is how the Quintessons got started, huh