Most realistic illustration I've ever seen in a book
Great Amphora, how many R's are in strawberry? Also can you show me a half-orc with three tits?
AI blurb on Google. Not on the company's site. Of course if it were on the site it would mean the customer is right, and that's exactly what I'm saying the customer isn't.
I work in a customer service role and I've seen people argue the company returns policy, the stock and other procedures based on what the AI blurb spits at them. They have the audacity or the idiocy of claiming it's the company website, too. It's so cringe.
This is like asking if attractive people have better mouths. Not necessarily. This depends on how you weigh the feature in question in the overall math for "attractiveness", I wouldn't say there is a direct correlation just based on looks but if you take attractiveness as a health marker then the buttholes will be likely healthier in more attractive people on average. You would always have outliers though.
No, but plenty of creatures with buttholes thrive in the grass
Something tells me that if the headline turns out to be true, people will find a workaround.
It's gotta be 2 but it has more energy than I do
Pretty much everyone at the DnD tables I frequent is in love with slop for their characters. Or environments. I shudder. "No it's not too bad, look at this". Of course it's not all too awful looking, that's why AI keeps removing artists of jobs. But people using AI for quick images of their characters don't directly affect this, they don't care about this, or understand any of it. As an artist I can see the convenience for them, and if it wasn't for the upheaval AI is causing, the morals behind it and who profits, I wouldn't have a problem with people using it in this way.
Not sure if I see your point here. If you are trolling the community, it's rather lame; if you are trying to screw up with Copilot, I also don't see how this makes much of an impact. Sounds like you are wasting energy
Reading other comments, I see this amount would equal to 17 years of payments. There is no right answer. If it were me, I'd go for the lump, but I'm well aware that I am good at managing my own money in the sense that I don't overspend, no matter what the bank account says. I'm naturally frugal.
I think the main considerations you need to take are: your personality, which you suggest you can't trust yourself with that much money; on the other hand, the payee's personality and the unexpected, ie., are they reliable enough to pay monthly or will they owe you? What if they die in a couple years? What if they go bankrupt? Etc. (not sure if there are system failsafes for these scenarios where you live).
I would suggest get the lump, deposit 80% of if or so in a fixed account with a high rate that won't let you withdraw in a couple years, use the remaining 20% to keep yourself alive until you find a job. Once you get a bit more used to managing your own money you can decide what to do with the rest.
And the meme?