I appreciate your candid feedback. Kuky is actually built on evidence-based peer support principles. Key research supporting our approach:
• Shalaby & Agyapong (2020), JMIR Mental Health – Peer support improves wellbeing and reduces stigma.
https://mental.jmir.org/2020/6/e15572
• Cooper et al. (2024), BMC Medicine – Peer-led interventions boost empowerment, hope, and connection.
https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s1291...
Thanks for the feedback, we thought about dating but it’s a saturated market & not really our passion. We care more about mental health if people meet & date because of Kuky, we’re okay with that as a byproduct
How do you analyze the videos with AI? Do you split the video into images and submit to AI or what? I’m curious because I’m building something similar for a client for a business use case.
Good quote put pretty ironic coming from the guy that ruined France economically and demographically for the next 100 years, and left it to lag behind the UK and the other Empires of the 19th century.
A coalition of monarchies did gang up and wage war on the French republic, to stop their crazy ideas from spreading.
Kind of parallel to France demanding Haiti pay them compensation for slaves being freed.
In both cases we'd generally look more kindly on republics and freeing slaves from the modern perspective, and maybe put more blame on the people trying to undermine them.
The Empire was formed after Napoleon's success in the wars of the Republican era, which occurred exactly because "A coalition of monarchies did gang up and wage war on the French republic".
Napoleon did not just emerge from the head of Zeus as a fully-formed Emporer.
And, technically, Napoleon headed the French government first while it was still nominally a Republic, under the Consulate of the Constitution of Year VIII.
Ok but as a French, we don't really think as 1789-1804 as "Napoleon's time". His empire was and remains what he his most remembered for. He's literally referred to as "l'empereur" (the emperor).
I don't think I need to expand on how his Empire wasn't really democratic, or a republic.
That's not a "slight" nitpick. While we can be grateful to Napoleon to bring modern law and scientific advances to the rest of Europe, he certainly didn't conquer it in the interest of democracy.
The post I replied to said Napolean ruined France compared with nearby empires.
I said the nearby empires were hostile to revolution and so keen to keep a Franch Republic down.
Wikipedia says:
> As early as 1791, the other monarchies of Europe looked with outrage at the revolution and its upheavals; and they considered whether they should intervene, either in support of King Louis XVI to prevent the spread of revolution, or to take advantage of the chaos in France. Austria stationed significant troops on its French border and together with Prussia issued the Declaration of Pillnitz, which threatened severe consequences should anything happen to King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette.
Ok but did he have to go as far as Russia? Couldn't he just consolidate his forces instead of getting drunk on conquest and waging war all the way to eastern-most Europe?
That's probably exactly what the other "side" is thinking.
For example:
They think that allowing people with penises to to change in women's locker rooms just because they identify as women is wicked, so they aren't being silent about it.
Look I think we should disagree on fiscal and social policy, and be able to deliberate over these issues.
And have a system of government that allows for that kind of debate and representative vote.
But "one side" is dismantling everything that was still democratic about the United States and turning into a massively one-sided (even one-manned) system of control. So whatever your opinion or mine on social policy no longer matter, because it's all up to the whims of a single person, with no recourse for the rest of us.
A strongman. A Caesar. Someone to champion the cultural values and identity we believe in. You don't have to like it, agree with it or understand it for it to happen.
Honestly I am trolling a little bit(maybe a lot) but this is literally how people think and no amount of discussion is going to change their minds. They want outcome A, you want outcome B, and there are very little (perhaps 0) shared values to build a cohesive foundation on which to compromise.
> no amount of discussion is going to change their minds
It's a slow process. A MAGA extremist isn't going to read "LGBT rights are human rights!" and say "Ah, I didn't realize! Of course!" and become a liberal.
Maybe they argue with someone about how tariffs are going to be great for the country, and they don't change their mind. But a few months later their neighbor in trucking loses their job, and their friend in construction is talking about how hard it is now, and they start to have a few doubts. They think back to how the guy they were arguing with said this would happen.
And then they argue with someone that only illegal aliens are going to be deported, and they don't change their mind. But then when US citizens start being sent to the camps, they remember that they thought this wouldn't happen and even argued against it.
People do change their mind eventually. Even violent fanatics have changed their minds: the Maoist Red Guards lost steam, the IRA followed a peace process as did FARC in Colombia. If you love liberty, democracy, peace, and prosperity, then I think your best move is to persist in trying to convince MAGA extremists, while understanding that it will take a long time and potentially a lot of chaos and conflict.
One of the most important lessons I've learned is that minds are not changed overnight, and thinking you can will drive you crazy. One's goal in engaging with people whose mind you want to change shouldn't actually be to convince them right there and then, but rather to encourage them to think about their position over time.
cultural values you say? like rape, corruption, extreme pettiness and selfishness?
these people are in a cult. their sunk cost bias is overwhelming most of their sanity.
and of course the world is not going in the way they wish, so their conflict resolution is to write a blank check to said strongman. (and project everything on him.)
But shipping people out of the country without due process, into a foreign high security prison, and ignoring a court order to bring him back, is a whole lot worse.
If that's what it takes to undo the moral decline of the last 30 years then so be it.
I'm sick of seeing insanity in schools, at work, and on the news everyday.
Our culture has been totally deconstructed and reversed where drag and pedophilia is celebrated, being diverse is more important than being skilled/having ability, being white is seen as tainted or somehow lesser than someone who has a diverse background. Beauty has been replaced with vulgarity and queerness.
The reversal has been a long time coming. We have had a silent majority that was too afraid to act because of the legal implications of going against powerful special interests.
I can say for myself that seeing the wars have had a detrimental impact on my life & faith in humanity. Hearing people try to justify a genocide makes me completely checkout. The algorithms also don't help when you keep seeing kids & families decimated constantly on your reddit, instagram & x feed with genocide drones. I'm convinced that we are living in one of the most regrettable times in our century.
I can't tell you how many developers feel this way, there is no reason for this to be the norm. Be sure to seek professional help but if you'd like someone to talk to someone who can relate feel free to book a time https://calendly.com/thanks_dev/30min
It says he used the money from redundancy to continue with his work. Pfizer would have a hard time winning that case because the discovery was made past their employment. Having field knowledge doesn't make it a crime. Coding is different because it's easier to copy paste functions & classes, it also doesn't help that everything has timestamps. Your best bet is to rewrite everything.
Maybe it's semantics, but I understand it was discovered while at Pfizer and further developed post-redundancy. IANAL but it definitely feels like a grey area?
It's not a grey area at all. The article literally says that he purchased the IP rights from Pfizer, and as part of the deal they got a small stake in his new company.
Microsoft recently announced they have generated 2Billion in ARR from Github Copilot. As part of corporate social responsibility, do you think Microsoft should give back to the open source community given that Copilot is technically trained by OSS maintainers??
