You need reasonable grounds to suspect that someone has committed an offence in order to arrest (plus a necessity).

This has been the case since 1984, the necessity was only added because SOCPA got rid of the distinction between arrestable and non-arrestable offences.

Kyiv

You didn't write it, tell me why I should read it?

What kind of question is that? I wrote something from memory, then as an afterthought fed it through a system that is quite good in giving cursory, fact-based review if its validity. You see the whole history and know the system prompt isn't something malicious against the context.

I don't like ChatGPT's biases in many things either but being that hard against it while it cites Reuters etc isn't really sensical.

Anything that could possibly justify the expense, I suspect, whether it is the right thing or not.

Isn't that true of all software development?

But we are lily-white both legally and ethically. One of the perks to a lifestyle business beholden to no investors.

You’ve used an LLM to write that, haven’t you.

No - and you can compare the style & written tics for continuity with my 18y of posts here.

I used 'delving' in an HN comment more than a decade before LLMs became a thing!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1278663

If you don’t know the answers, how can you judge the machine output?

A lot of inquiries are like hash functions. Hard to find, easy to verify.

“Siri, show me an example of overconfidence”

Why would you want to read something that isn’t written by a human?

For entertainment or education, where it doesn't matter who or what wrote it. It's not as if we have any human relationship with the authors of most content, such as books, etc. or even online content.

Conversate is not a word.

yes it is

It is not.

The word "conversate" is in the dictionary [1], labelled as "non-standard". That doesn't mean it's not a word. Most people would be able to easily infer its meaning.

English is a living language, words come and go.

I don't understand the objection.

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conversate

Because it is either laziness, ignorance or AI slop.

I wouldn't agree that using an understandable word that's in the merriam-webster dictionary is being ignorant or lazy. Nor would I call something AI slop because of a single word, without otherwise engaging with the content.

I do genuinely wonder why some people can be so derailed by odd or unfamiliar words and grammar. Are they stressed? Not wanting to engage with a conversation? Trying to assert status or intellectual superiority? Being aggressive and domineering to assuage their self-worth? Perhaps they feel threatened by cultural change? I assume it has something to do with emotional regulation, given that I can't recall bumping into too many mature people who do such things.

Might you have any insight to offer?

lol, no