There is no record of this bio
Depends on how you store data on it. If you write with a pen its optical.
No, that’s a tape. It has to be dis(c/k) shaped to be a disk.
Its a disk when its magnetic, disc when optical.
The way to remember it is that its disk because its magnetik.
It helps that they lie about the range.
I get 10% off when spending cash at cool stores tho.
Imagine paying fines with a credit card, in current year 2021.
But rich and powerful people have the budget to afford social media managers to curate a beneficial public image for themselves. The smart ones know not to make public statements for themselves.
All sides are hypocrites when it comes to political violence. “Political violence is never acceptable” isn’t the guiding principle underpinning any president or legislator’s policy devisions. They only say it after political violence targets a member of their own class.
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.
GNU’s not Unix image manipulation program toolkit.
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.
Mods, please remove comments like this…