Pika

I’m not sure of the complaint, is the tag not accurate? If you use AI to make something are you not making it with ai? Like if I use strawberry to make a cake would the tag made with strawberries be inaccurate?

Like I failed to see the argument, if you don’t want to be labeled as something accurate don’t use it otherwise deal with it.

I see this link posted everywhere for weeks now but like, I’ve never been able to use it. The US version of it recommends the DGCCRF which is exclusive to France or visitors thereof. It’s weird that it doesn’t recommend a US branch or have the FTC section at the top

You can put a different name than what’s yours as the author, but unfortunately if someone is dedicated if you’re writing style is still similar it’s not outside the realm of possibility that someone might be able to connect the dot eventually. Unlikely unless you got super huge, but not impossible

I actually think this is a nice feature, not really sure the argument of like “well Capital One isn’t a great company anyway so it’s not you they’re looking after”

So because they’re not a good company means that they shouldn’t have good features? So should I not benefit from a feature that the bank/lender gives me?

I’m much happier that they’re airing on the side of caution and asking me about it then just ignoring it and having me maybe miss it or find out months down the road. Worst case scenario? I get an extra email that I can ignore.

I’m not sure I agree with that, Arch 100% should continue to be mentioned. Just because the Trojan didn’t launch due to the fact that Arch’s environment didn’t meet its criteria, doesn’t mean you should keep a known malicious package on your system.

People keep preaching to the heavens that Arch was not affected by it, but they don’t always state that Arch was infected by it, it just never binds the library to SSHD like Debian systems do (for systemd notifications) so the attack vector is never made.

The arch Wiki official statement on it is that you should remove the malicious package and do a full system update. Which should be common sense, but people have to be aware that the system is infected by it in order to know that they have to remove it. A process that if Arch was never mentioned as being involved users wouldn’t think to do

If they forced separation between chromium and Google I would say go for it, but as it’s standing there is way too much power for Google to be like hey nudge nudge do it this way and then they would control the entire ecosystem

With that being said I do still think that there should be some form of competition regardless

Yeah I’m well aware I have myself as do not disturb on most platforms and have already decided it’s going to be a lost cause to find any of my Discord servers because more than half of them change their icon and channel names, woohoo 4/1 e.e

Thanks for the reminder, just set an event for 11:50 to go DND for 24h

I’m tempted to try now lmao I can see it now tempfix3💀

I do, the issue is I’m the ONLY one who does. My mom raised me to take shoes off indoors but I’m not sure where she learned it from because nobody else in the family does.

I gave up keeping the floor clean, I’m the only one that cleaned in the house, any complaints about the dirt on the floor was met with “well you should be wearing shoes”, any attempt at cleaning the clutter is met with the other household members stressed out because things changed. I take any W I can, but it’s defo a learn to get used to it type of situation at least in my case, and dirt isn’t going to go away sadly.

I had to start wearing slippers so I didn’t feel the dirt and it stopped getting in my sheets, that might help you avoid noticing it as much if you don’t already do so

I wanted to take it, but mobile is so not that sites first or even 8th priority.

Yes they would, that is why I am for UBI however not without harsh restrictions on rental or mortgage costs in regards to the UBI. I’m not concerned for normal prices but, I know rental and housing costs will rise in comparison. Needs restrictions before implementation

I don’t disagree, however I think there’s room for both the state and the consumer to benefit from this by restriction who can use them, this being via a license or certification similar to how non-personnel licenses currently, that would restrict the amount of them on the road as it is and it would also increase the money that can go back into the infrastructure,

Now something that I believe needs to be hard banned would be the halogen lights, we just had a three vehicle pile up in my state where two people died, and the current rolling story is that they believe the car that collided head-on with the vehicle that swerved into their Lane was unable to see whether or not the vehicle was in his lane or the other lane due to the fact that the lights on the vehicle were blinding, and honestly I believe that rumor. Those light bulbs are far more hazardous than any lifted vehicles in my opinion

I don’t think banning them but, going the direction the EU did would bd nice, large vehicles require a different class license I’ve been told

“I miss my Activate windows to continue watermark, my desktop isn’t complete without it!” - End User

regional pricing is the phrase you are looking for friend!

I’ve been forgetting my age since I was like 13 of 14, age is quite pointless in the terms of things, I consistently need to think about it when I say my age lol, it makes my coworkers give a second glance

I fully agree, a project should have as little ties to illegal content as it can, and yes the current system goes off of current legal law or at least how the judge/Jury interpret it. And that’s where a lot of this issue comes to play.

It’s quite clear in existing law that you are legally allowed to reverse engineer a piece of equipment that you have physically purchased, there is no argument on that. The issue occurs when you are reverse engineering something that has DRM because at that point you were breaking a security standard. This is also why most emulators are legal however ROMs are not, because while it’s completely legal to reverse engineer a switch for example, the ability to bypass the DRM on the game itself in order to play the game is breaking a security standard which is not referenced in existing laws or backup laws.

This, in my opinion is the biggest issue with current laws, it makes no sense for me to be allowed to make a digital Archive of something that I have, but not be allowed to circumvent the security on the item itself in order to actually use the archive. Due to this it also means that ripping 4K and Blu-ray discs also are breaking a DRM which means you are legally not allowed to make a digital copy of movies that you own. Which directly contradicts the intent of these laws.

Of course I’m talking about in the US, other countries have a more lapse ideology for a data retention and archival purposes. Maybe someday as the younger Generations get older they will reapproach current dmca and copyright law and give exemption for personal use to allow breaking DRM, but until that happens expect every emulator is going to have this same exact claim every time

I don’t see how that is the Yuzo teams problem though, it’s the same argument people use with firearms, just because the emulator can be used to emulate contribute piracy doesn’t mean that it was made with the intent to. How would you recommend the Yuzo team actively block non-released games/restrict it down to only legal use? They used the telemetry data that they recieved to better improve their own platform, honestly it doesn’t really matter what that data is. The issue is fully at the user who used the tool illegally, not the developers of the tool.

God I hate current copyright law, in my opinion they need to do seething similar to the legal systems “when acting as an official” law and just have them exempt from copyright/privacy suits. This happens with every emulator and it’s generally used as a scare tactic to make the devs close shop.