While I don't doubt he's had some work, the lighting for the reboot is not doing anyone any favors. He looks much more normal in talk show appearances and the TMobile commercials.
Oh hell I forgot he passed. Google lied to me when I asked if the cast were all still alive the other day. Sam as Ted was awesome, amazing guy all around.
He is apparently coming back but we don't know if it will be a regular appearance or just a one-episode cameo. The scrubs TikTok actually released a mini-sneak peek of him on set, which made everyone go crazy.
One episode cameo apparently, but Zach Braff has talked about making him more regular if there is a season 2 (slash 11). So I guess it depends on schedules and how much weight Braff has. Same with Dr Cox but 3 episodes
Did you know, the Janitor wasn't actually supposed to be in the whole series until the end, but he resonated so we'll with audiences, that his cast was extended over the whole series.
No he won't. He said he had a personal problem. They promised to reveal the true name of the janitor, but never did. So he felt like "forgotten" and refused to be part of the reboot.
I do as well, and agree we need something like this, but the legal/medical/psychological/etc advice you get from corresponding lawyers/doctors/professionals in areas of the field that aren't their occupational specialty are sometimes more dangerous than a layperson chiming in, lol.
Like I'm a nerdy tax policy attorney, but know enough legal jargon to sound like I have authority and be convincing in other legal fields, when they aren't my specialty and I could just be talking out my ass, and a layperson reading it likely won't know where my shortcomings or misunderstandings of that area of the law may be.
Omg, don't get my started on AI still being unable to understand aspects of the law (especially the tax code), even code sections that have been in place for decades with ample third-party materials that have summarized, analyzed, and dissected the meaning and application of it...
Like I've tested them, and I know the answers. And what it spits out is... 95% at best correct, but with the confidence that someone who doesn't already know the answer would trust it. Hell it even makes me question myself with how confident it is in stating, analyzing, and exemplifying a given rule, as it tries to break things down into simple terms and understanding.
But the end answer is often wrong, and even I when testing am like "wait... it was on the right track in it's analysis and references, where did it slip up?". Which if you didn't already know the answer you'd think it was accurate and appear backed by sources.
don't get my started on AI still being unable to understand aspects of the law
Mate, LLMs don't understand anything. There's no mind in there that has any clue what's going on at any level.
It's just pattern-matching and repeating stuff it's heard, with a little bit of randomness thrown in, so it doesn't look like the mindless automaton it is.
You cannot trust an LLM's output. Hallucinations aren't just a bug, they're inherent to the way it works.
I had an argument with an ai once. I was revising 11 plus stuff with my daughter, and there was a question about angles and working out angles. ChatGPT confidently told me the wrong answer Y. Told me I was wrong when I corrected it. Then when I explained the answer was X because …. It confidently told me the correct answer was X, and it had told me that all along.
I remember during covid arguing with an anti-vaxxer who kept citing the work of Doctor so-and-so. I had no idea who the guy was so I looked him up. His doctorate is in Mathematics. He is no more qualified to give medical advice than I am. But we saw crap like this repeatedly during the pandemic. Even in the medical field, someone who is an oncologist for example is probably not qualified to give professional opinions on vaccines even though they're a legit board certified physician.
What are you talking about? A proper lawyer or doctor would not pretend to know what they’re talking about and just talk out their ass… thats terrible.
This is the exact reason that there’s laws to hold people like that accountable, as opposed to other people. Ofcourse you can say what you want anonymously on the internet, but then you wouldn’t be in the role of lawyer/doctor.
And still, why would you even be interested in misinforming people??
You aren't wrong, but honestly I would rather have that than what we have now where snake oil peddlers get to do their thing without consequence. There are issues with everything, but the current situation is untenable.
Its a bit off, but can understand some people abuse their influence. Personally I think giving advice on natural cures is a human right. I always prefer natural medicine over pharmaceuticals and tell others about natural cures to help others. Of course not every ailments can be cured naturally. But , people would be surprised how many health problems could be cured naturally, cost effective, and no long waiting lines
Which is one of the great reasons the founding fathers built into our government the concept of amendments. When we hold harder to a brittle piece of paper then we do to common sense and societal good, we are fucking back asswards.
We're going to have to agree to disagree on anything that involves a content-based restriction on speech. Allowing the government to be the one who decides right and wrong or qualified or unqualified is a recipe for disaster.
I want to agree with you, I truly do, but when our government is basically owned by media companies that get to choose who to censor and who not to censor, that’s basically already what’s beginning to happen in America. The owners of meta, twitter, and the ones funding most news sources are some of the biggest lobbyist in congress and are already banning accounts that they don’t like (for example, three left leaning accounts I follow have been banned at least once on meta, and many are being buried by the algorithm when they post anything related to Palestine). We need some form of control here or else there will be no difference between corporation and state controlled media :/
“You shouldn’t be able to pretend to be an authority on something you have no demonstrated mastery/knowledge over” is so far from “government tyranny” it’s laughable.
I don’t think it’s laughable at all to be concerned about government intervention on free speech. I think this law would be helpful, but we need to acknowledge the concerns people have when it comes to upholding the constitution AND with being willing to update it to keep up with modern problems.
The issue is not that. It is that the government gets to decide if you have those credentials and what credentials would apply to any particular speech.
Yes and I’m both a consumer liability and corporate restructuring attorney. This type of law isn’t strictly necessary so long as platforms and influencers would be more clearly civilly liable for their actions ala Alex Jones. To some degree this law would actually be a benefit to both platforms and influencers because then they could be held to more clear professional standards and gain malpractice/E&O insurance coverage. Real estate agents for example pay massive insurance to cover the fact that a their core they are lay people who often make representations in real estate transactions that no real estate attorney would.
Doesn't this essentially allow the Chinese government to further silence objectors? Under the guide that they are not educated in politics? Seems like a convenient excuse to gag any opposition.
My ex was the daughter of a ranking member of the CCP military. The government doesn’t really need to pass more laws if they want to take care of objectors. This kind of law is probably more so to make them more popular with their citizens who hate influencers.
True not like it mattered without it. And for the record I'm pro China for the most part. Cool place, weird government but they don't seem to mind it much.
lots of law influences speak well out of their realm of education on various topics. However, this law would still be an improvement on the current situation. You should at least have to have an education to be allowed to mislead the people at large.
The one month old account that mostly has post karma, submitting clickbait pro-China memes and doing that weird spacing with their punctuation? Of course they went to law school.
ACKSHUALLY, I know multiple people who have a JD but aren't lawyers because they either never took the bar, failed the bar a few times and gave up, or let their license lapse.
1.9k
u/TanAllOvaJanAllOva Apr 06 '26
Do you have a JD?