Why would you need a law to make someone sell to the highest bidder?
To contribute: http://warrior.archiveteam.org/
Help? https://wiki.archiveteam.org/
Background on the project: https://netzpolitik.org/2023/archive-team-shutdowns-dont-stop-during-the-weekends/
I wish people would go straight to the source for these stories. No reason to link to something that only paraphrases a press release and adds some ads.
Press release (contains link to indictment):
You're allowed to use copyrighted works for lots of reasons. EG ~~satire~~ parody, in which case you can legally publish it and make money.
The problem is that this precise situation is not legally clear. Are you using the service to make the image or is the service making the image on your request?
If the service is making the image and then sending it to you, then that may be a copyright violation.
If the user is making the image while using the service as a tool, it may still be a problem. Whether this turns into a copyright violation depends a lot on what the user/creator does with the image. If they misuse it, the service might be sued for contributory infringement.
Basically, they are playing it safe.
Trivia (from Wikipedia): "Taxman" from their 1966 album Revolver was the group's first topical song and the first political statement they had made in their music.
"Taxman" was influential in the development of British psychedelia and mod-style pop, and has been recognised as a precursor to punk rock. When performing "Taxman" on tour in the early 1990s, Harrison adapted the lyrics to reference contemporaneous leaders, citing its enduring quality beyond the 1960s. The song's impact has extended to the tax industry and into political discourse on taxation.
Unlike their other political songs, which are fairly vague peace&love jobs, this one tackles a concrete issue: It protests the 95% top marginal tax rate.
You've heard how "the boomers" screwed up everything for later generations. Here's exhibit A from pop culture. Don't just think about evil, old men in smoky backrooms.
-
What laws do you want?
-
How would they be enforced?
-
What practical effects would that have?
Why do I have to think of Chakotay?
There are certainly purposes for which one wants as much of the raw sensor readings as possible. Other than science, evidence for legal proceedings is the only thing that comes to mind, though.
I'm more disturbed by the naive views so many people have of photographic evidence. Can you think of any historical photograph that proves anything?
Really famous in the US: The marines raising the flag over Iwo Jima. It was staged for the cameras, of course. What does it prove?
A more momentous occasion is illustrated by a photograph of Red Army soldiers raising the soviet flag over the Reichstag. The rubble of Berlin in the background gives it more evidentiary value, but it is manipulated. It was not only staged but actually doctored. Smoke was added in the background and an extra watch on a soldier's arm (evidence of robbery) removed.
Closer to now: As you are aware, anti-American operatives are trying to destroy the constitutional order of the republic. After the last election, they claimed to have video evidence of fraud during ballot counting. On one short snippet of video, one sees a woman talking to some people and then, after they leave, pull a box out from under a table. It's quite inconspicuous, but these bad actors invented a story around this video snippet, in which a "suitcase" full of fraudulent ballots is taken out of hiding after observers leave.
As psychologists know, people do not think in strictly rational terms. We do not take in facts and draw logical conclusion. Professional manipulators, such as advertisers, know that we tend to think in "narratives". If a story is compelling, we like to twist neutral snippets of fact into evidence. We see what we believe.
policymakers on both sides of the aisle agreed that First Amendment protections ought to safeguard the privacy of people's viewing habits, or else risk chilling their speech by altering their viewing habits.
Oh, that's a clever take.
Coffee machines and drink dispensers are already a thing, though?
Yes. The Commission tried to get manufacturers to adopt this voluntarily for years. They almost all did. Almost. Basically, this needs to be binding legislation just for Apple.
General_Effort
joined 8 months ago
I have spent a disturbing amount of time trying to decide if it was necessary to clarify that she was found dead inside the python. I believe that, yes, it was. Make of that what you will.