There is no record of this bio
google’s android camera app is designed to open google’s gallery app. Google built an OS that has support for user selected app launching. They built a system that lets an app request the user’s preferred gallery app to view photos, but then chose to not use it to force anyone using google’s camera to also use their photos app. fuck google
I don’t like most western RPGs because all the enemies are sponges. You can’t sell weapon upgrades if the weapons are already balanced.
Western RPGs often have interesting systems like speech and other noncombat abilities. This is what keeps me coming back to RPGs despite everything. But upgrades are done with the same currency, so investing in speech means underinvestment in the manditory combat making it even more unpleasant.
I would much rather play a game about combat, movement, or speech than a game that awkwardly tries to make all three sit comfortabky next to each other. JRPGs are often more focused, so I do prefer them, a bit.
ooooooopppppps someday I will learn to read
deleted by creator
I am illiterate ignore me.
>Senk received a DMCA notice from Cloudflare’s trust and safety team, which was then hosting the parody site.
Cloudflare sent themselves a DMCA takedown notice, instead of just taking down the content from their own web hosting for violating their policies. Weird.
Then what is a russian bot?
Companies are run by people. The human employees create copyrighted works that become the property of their employer by the terms of their contract. That’s how work for hire contracts work…
You would know this if you have ever worked in any creative field.
Because fair use is an affirmative defense to copyright infringement. To use a fair use defense you have to admit your work is infringing, but argue that the infringement is justifiable.
Trying to defend the AI with fair use requires you to admit the AI itself is infringing, but justifiable, and by the doctrine of fair use, it is almost certainly not.
Only humans can hold copyrights. Your example would be a non-infringing work because it lacks direct copying. An AI doing the same would make an uncopyrightable work, with the AI itself being infinging if you tried the fair use defense.
Fair use is a legal doctrine relating to derivitave works based on copyrighted works. An AI model’s fair use determination would be judged by the same standards and all derivative works.
It doesn’t matter how they used the copyrighted works. This factor is about scale not intent.
There are four factors, and no single factor is determinative. But admitting their model uses as much training as possible makes their model less likely to be fair use.
One of the four fair use factors is the portion of the copyrighted work that was taken. For a finding of fair use under this factor, the infringing work must only take the amount of copyrighted material needed for the infringing work’s purpose.
If they ripped every single file they have access to, there’s no way to be found as fair use under this factor. If they argue they were using a curated list of only the works they needed to develop their model it could be fair use, but admitting to taking every possible work in their entirety is a surefire way to fail a fair use defense.
The commenters fragile mental disorder might be a social and personal pathology though.
whether a game is “dead” or not only really matters for online games with matchmaking. If a game requires a large playerbase to function, like an MMO or a matchmaking based competitive game, the game can die. This doesn’t apply to single player or small scale coop games.
Anyone will get the full single player game experience even if they are the only one playing. If the game has multiplayer, like coop or vs play where the expectation is that you will find the person who you will play with, the game cannot die.
Calling palworld a dead game is just as nonsensical as calling starfield dead because of a lower playercount. It literally doesn’t matter for this kind of game.
Russia now has a social credit system just like china and also the united states
It says (parody) in the name.
This is twitter, because elon lacks reading comprehension, so the rules require parody to be clearly marked.
They want to advertise a $2 chicken box without actually selling chicken for $2.
Her plane is worse than most. Its one of the last trijets in production. Planes with a small number of large engines are more efficient than planes with many small engines, which is why modern planes are all twinjets with wide high-bypass engines.
Airlines care about fuel efficiency. A minor reduction in fuel burn results in increased profits, and they operate large fleets. A small increase in efficiency across an entire fleet is huge. If you own a private jet, you are spending huge amounts of money to have one, the cost of fuel would only be a minor concern.
The solution to private jets is regulation. Private jets don’t need to exist. They don’t need to be replaced by another kind of airplane. The solution is to replace all planes on overland routes with electrified rail. Let the rich buy private railcars for transport.
I’m not skeptical on the concept of small aircraft. I wanted to give context because very few people will picture bush planes and puddle jumpers from the mention of “commercial aviation.”
PS: My calculations for fuel burn were based on comparing the range to the fuel capacity. Those are the numbers I have ready access. Planes are much less efficient when the tanks are full, and swift’s plane has a longer range, so it’s probably not quite as bad as my calculations indicate on comparable flights.
The carbon comes from the fuel. Burning a ton of jet fuel will release the same amount of carbon regardless of the plane that burns it.
Taylor Swift’s plane is a Dassault Falcon 7X. It weighs around 17 tons and seats 12 to 16 passengers.
Her plane burns 60% less fuel than a 737 MAX 8. However, her plane holds 9% of the passengers of the MAX 8, so its far less efficient per passenger than typical commercial aircraft.
Private planes are not a huge contributor to carbon emissions in comparison to others. They’re bad, obviously. But there are far more commercial airplanes, and they fly much more frequently than private jets.
Private jets get people’s attention. One person being directly responsible for that much carbon is notable is unconscionable. But it’s the scale of transportation overall that is the issue.
I got the number from wikipedia. Following the references, the number came from a BP datasheet about Jet A-1, where it is listed on a typical properties table, and the number is the net specific energy, which means it accounts for the inefficiency of the engines. Or at least that’s my assumption.
All the weights listed were operating empty weight. The battery planes will be even smaller than the planes I listed for comparison.
Weights of planes vary in flight, so I picked the one that disadvantages the point I’m trying to make in the interest of fairness.
Sounds like you want trademark reform.
There are basically no requirements for maintaining trademarks. If a company owns a name they can use that name and branding forever, no matter how false it becomes, no matter how much the business or product changes, they can keep the name. This shouldn’t be the case.
If an ice cream company is named after their two founders, the company shouldn’t be able to keep using their names after they’re no longer involved. But under current laws they can.
A glass company can build its reputation on making heatproof glass, then change the glass so its no longer heatproof, while still selling it under the same name. This is unjust.
Companies should be forced to rebrand upon major changes. Current trade mark laws are fundamentally misleading.