If it's not infringement to input copyrighted materials, then it's not infringement to take the output.
Copyright can be enforced at both ends or neither end, not one or the other.
If it's not infringement to input copyrighted materials, then it's not infringement to take the output.
Copyright can be enforced at both ends or neither end, not one or the other.
That's equivalent to 24,000 hours at the federal minimum wage.
There are only 8,760 hours in a year.
If it improves the President's approval rating, doesn't that suggest that it's something Americans need or want?
"[...] I'm not going to do it. Why would I?"
Indeed. Why help the American people, Congressman?
It's telling that no member of the Supreme Court was willing to put their name on that decision.
“The president is elected by the entire nation, and it should be the entire nation who determines who they want for president, whether they are guilty of insurrection or not,” Bobb said during an interview on Real America’s Voice. “It’s up to the people.”
When was the last time a Republican won the popular vote?
The difference, of course, is that in this case there is an actual panel and death is actually on the table.
And their Christofascist fans don't even realize it's a sin to consult a psychic.
This is why the big search engines are throwing money at large language models. They hope AI-curated results is the next revolutionary advance.
I think there could be a reasonable discussion in the context of his mental competence. Worsening personal hygiene is a red flag for dementia, etc.
That said, the "hurr hurr smells liek butt" level of rhetoric is probably unproductive and shouldn't be condoned.
In "his" case, not "this" case.
He wants people like me to be executed for existing. It would be rude not to reciprocate.
A better question is: Why not?
If Copyright doesn't protect what goes in, why should it protect what comes out?