I think it's a false dichotomy. In the past I've worked with a number of people who were clearly both incompetent and evil. In fact, someone seems to be circulating some secret playbook amongst these types to teach them how to use the excuse of incompetence to maximize their evildoing without actually accidentally becoming competent at anything other than that.
Heh, my thoughts exactly. How much you wanna bet that the primary workflow for using this "air-gapped" cloud involves connecting to it over public internet lines from Microsoft Windows desktops.
If this was a security service job, then this means they've extracted all the value they could from discovering his identity.
It doesn't mean they took four years to find him, but it might mean in those four years they've traced and identified an entire network of Russian intelligence operations.
The noble savage myth is bullshit. They warred, they destroyed habitats and moved on... They simply lacked the technology (and this population) to do it on the kind of scales we do it today.
Stories that were told in comics can be good and work.
Comic book stories - those low quality ones that fans will buy because they are fans - don't work beyond that limited audience. "Hey, let's throw these comic cliches together and forget actual writing" isn't good enough.
Now get a director who doesn't understand what works in the genre and give him a committee-vetted script base on one of those comic book stories, and you're going to get feces.
Your VPN creates a default route leading to its virtual interface to send all IP traffic across the tunnel, but the static routes configured via DHCP take precedence
This is one possibility, but your VPN app does not Have to work this way. You can also write the VPN app to periodically scan the routing tables and Suspend the network connection with an Alert Popup displayed if a New route is detected that was not present when the VPN connection started.
You can have the VPN app so that when it first connects, It will install a more-specific route for every IP address covered by a route entry the DHCP client installed.
A
On linux you can create IP RULE entries that indicate which routing table to use, then create rules that say Every destination IP address except for your Router IP, and your VPN Endpoint IP use a different routing table ID, which you leave empty except for the one default route pointing to your VPN's virtual interface.
Ok. So if Sweden uses their excess green power for sequestration instead of export... The export market will use power from other sources instead, releasing more CO2 than Sweden sequesters.
Only if there was no export option would it make sense (on a local scale). You can't beat thermodynamics...
The Rabbit R1 sounds an awful lot like they built a cheap mobile phone locked down to a single app and tried to sell it as a magic box.
If it sounds scammy, it's probably a scam.
We burn things to release heat. From this we generate power and release carbon.
To sequester carbon, you need to reverse this process. This means it takes energy to do it.
Neither process is 100% efficient.
Unless you have an excess of 'green' energy, sequestration will necessarily cause a net release of carbon. It isn't just pointless, it is actually counterproductive.
A monkey pressing the shutter button gets the same result as the human doing so. The creative element is the human having them press the button.
It seems that you failed to realize the reference. The Monkey pressing the button to Take her own Selfie is a specific case already ruled by the US government as Non-Copyrightable. Having the animal press the button is Not a human creative element eligible for copyright protection.
The human having them press the button is the very argument for copyright-ability that was in fact argued and Rejected by the government. It wouldn't matter that the human set up the camera beforehand and had special settings applied before the monkey took the photo, either. Camera settings on their own wouldn't even meet the threshold for copyrightability
If I roll glue on a paper and toss up some confetti and let air currents drop it randomly it is still my creative work and eligible for copyright by me even though ACTUAL random processes placed the visual elements.
You can try to make that argument: But you would almost certainly not be granted protection for the specific pattern of Confetti you got randomly. You had better have a unique glue pattern or something, involved in the work and deliberate in your process that incorporates a human's creative expression no matter how small, in the work, such as your framing or manner of presenting that pattern within a larger work, or the whole result is likely non-copyrightable; the creative expression does not have to be massive, but parts of a work that are the human creative expression are the Only kind of elements copyright protects. Unprotected elements are the parts of your work that anyone else would be free to copy - if there's no exclusive right, the parts that can be separated from protectable elements are public domain.
The creativity came in the form of deciding to do such a thing
The decision to do something is Not a copyrightable nor protectable element for a work. You can create many things which are Not copyrightable. Copyright law does not protect the decision to do something, nor the sweat of the brow, etc, just like Ideas, Methods, General styles etc are not protectable.
Do I need to distinguish between my creative elements and those introduced by outside agency? No, random processes have no agency or creative elements.
You do not have to make this distinction as an author. But if you ever want to register the Copyright formally or go to court and claim another work infringes upon yours, Then as part of the process you have to break your work down into Elements you created which you believe Are Original, the expression of your human creativity, and the expression found inside your work you are claiming a right to exclude others from using.
Elements outside your agency like the result of natural process you didn't control are not your creativity and they are called Unprotected Elements. Meaning they are parts of your work which are not your original authorship. You have the freedom to include as many unprotected or public domain elements in your work as you want, but you don't have exclusive rights to unprotected or public domain elements.
If your work consists ONLY of natural process, then you may not have Any exclusive rights to the work at all. That is the case of the Monkey who took a selfie of itself... The person who owns the camera has the right to use it; You can even claim it as yours, but they have no exclusive rights (You can't prevent others reproducing it) since No element of the work was the product of human authorship; this 100% of the elements in the selfie are not protectable by copyright.
In the case of TTS the user is calibrating inflection, style variation, adjusting outputs until they find a model and combination which suits their creative tastes
You say that, but in reality maybe they are just pasting the book's text into a TTS, and clicking "Regenerate", until the AI spits out something they like, And the style variation or Inflection is non-copyrightable. Claiming copyright against someone in court ultimately requires being able to prove Copying of elements from your work AND that those specific elements are the Author's personal original creative expressions actually authored by the human.
The user would be processing the book in segments and chunks or at least going back to portions and reselecting, discarding and curating the outputs to their tastes.
Copyright only protects authors. Selectively Discarding or Approving items on its own, merely curating works, is considered Not to be authorship of those works. Even giving an Artist vague instructions and continually Disapproving their result until you get lucky and they randomly give you what you want does Not make you the author of their art piece.
These things don't just run on autopilot like some people think. Much like a 3D printer or CNC
No, However not all work is authorship. Even if you were creative in how you went about doing the work. For example we don't afford copyright protection to the person at the print shop who pressed Control+P to print the file you sent them -- Not even if they exerted a great amount of creativity in optimizing their business process, carefully tuned their printers to make sure they would use just the right amount of ink, And started curating at their own discretion which Pages of your document they would print using different methods, and what pages they would exclude from the final book.
You need to be able to prove that your human creativity is expressed in a work itself, And not that you Iterated a machine until it came up with this.
there is a creative element in operating the machine
Similarly... Photocopy machine authors don't get a copyright on the outputs of the machine. Not even if they have to very finely tune it to achieve a desired exposure level.
It doesn't matter how hard your job is, how many settings you have to tune to work your machine, Or how creative you have to be to get your machine to work. To get that "copyrightable creative expression" - you had to have directed or created the expression, not caused the expression.
I already fail to understand why you need a different app for different webpages. Why do you need an app for Facebook, for Youtube, for whatever else where there's a webpage you can access with a browser?
nowhere near the breakeven point for a hardware device
Let's hope it stays that way, dies a fiery death and serves as a warning for wannabe-copycats to avoid ideas like this like the plague.
It did get press cover? Am I reading the wrong (or was that right?) news outlets?
Seriously, what?
Ok, could someone please explain to me whether I'm just living under a rock and am the only one who never heard about this new hip and trendy product, or whether this is just a very weak attempt to astroturf for yet another AI crap nobody gives a fuck about to pretend it's relevant.
If you can already set up a rogue DHCP server on my network that can hand out an address to a VPN client before my own, my network is already lost.
You're using a keyboard! How quaint!
