Reposted by Dimitris Angelou
This is hilarious!!!
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
October 8, 2025 at 7:41 AM
This is hilarious!!!
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
I personally use this add-on that hides it, and Google doesn't bother me anymore.
addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo...
The problem is that the general population will be affected, shown the answer with some links as "sources" bellow, and believe that it's credible. What a time to be alive.
addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo...
The problem is that the general population will be affected, shown the answer with some links as "sources" bellow, and believe that it's credible. What a time to be alive.
October 8, 2025 at 7:41 AM
I personally use this add-on that hides it, and Google doesn't bother me anymore.
addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo...
The problem is that the general population will be affected, shown the answer with some links as "sources" bellow, and believe that it's credible. What a time to be alive.
addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo...
The problem is that the general population will be affected, shown the answer with some links as "sources" bellow, and believe that it's credible. What a time to be alive.
Google generated a false story, you pointed that out, and that exact post was used by Google to double down.
This could lead to a really messed up timeline that we won't be able to find the original source of various claims.
This could lead to a really messed up timeline that we won't be able to find the original source of various claims.
October 8, 2025 at 7:41 AM
Google generated a false story, you pointed that out, and that exact post was used by Google to double down.
This could lead to a really messed up timeline that we won't be able to find the original source of various claims.
This could lead to a really messed up timeline that we won't be able to find the original source of various claims.
This is hilarious!!!
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
October 8, 2025 at 7:41 AM
This is hilarious!!!
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
If you search the same query now, it uses your post on instagram (that it OCRed) as a source which is the screenshot of a previous interaction with the same tool.
Google: "Source: me".
I'm not sure why you used “or.” If he acted wrongfully, that’s a crime and he’s technically a “criminal,” as you said. Ignorance of the law (or contract in our case) doesn’t make someone innocent.
October 8, 2025 at 7:32 AM
I'm not sure why you used “or.” If he acted wrongfully, that’s a crime and he’s technically a “criminal,” as you said. Ignorance of the law (or contract in our case) doesn’t make someone innocent.
In that case he was rightfully charged. Am I missing something ?
We can discuss the fact that those cameras exist in the first place, but if the contract was not over he interfered and damaged the county’s property.
We can discuss the fact that those cameras exist in the first place, but if the contract was not over he interfered and damaged the county’s property.
October 8, 2025 at 5:16 AM
In that case he was rightfully charged. Am I missing something ?
We can discuss the fact that those cameras exist in the first place, but if the contract was not over he interfered and damaged the county’s property.
We can discuss the fact that those cameras exist in the first place, but if the contract was not over he interfered and damaged the county’s property.
From another article:
The Sergeant got a copy of the MOU from the Missouri Department of Public Safety (DPS). It was signed on May 15, 2022, by Camden County Sheriff Tony Helms and states, “this MOU will commence once executed by both parties and shall continue for a period of Five (5) years.”
The Sergeant got a copy of the MOU from the Missouri Department of Public Safety (DPS). It was signed on May 15, 2022, by Camden County Sheriff Tony Helms and states, “this MOU will commence once executed by both parties and shall continue for a period of Five (5) years.”
October 8, 2025 at 5:16 AM
From another article:
The Sergeant got a copy of the MOU from the Missouri Department of Public Safety (DPS). It was signed on May 15, 2022, by Camden County Sheriff Tony Helms and states, “this MOU will commence once executed by both parties and shall continue for a period of Five (5) years.”
The Sergeant got a copy of the MOU from the Missouri Department of Public Safety (DPS). It was signed on May 15, 2022, by Camden County Sheriff Tony Helms and states, “this MOU will commence once executed by both parties and shall continue for a period of Five (5) years.”