You can certainly make an argument for the former, but as for the latter, the copyright holder in this case has been aware of the image's use for decades and taken no action to defend their copyright. Case law on this is clear: they have no claim at this point. Further, the implication of legitimate academic and research use over the course of several decades would itself make any copyright claim difficult at best. At this point, it is highly unlikely that the wishes of the copyright holder matter, from a legal perspective.

We did pay a lot of money to build out that fossil fuel infrastructure; it would be nice to find a way to keep using it that also reduces or eliminates CO2 emissions. Discarding it would be wasteful.

If you're married, then you know that sometimes this kind of thing can be worth it just to avoid starting another argument.

The dam will never produce so much as a watt of clean power ever again.

On the other hand, Apple took in around $276,700,000 in net profit today, and will do so again tomorrow, and the next day, and so on for the forseeable future, so I think they'll be okay.

You could also look at it from the other direction: many common tasks are designed to be performed using a pair of human hands.

To be fair, Musk seems to go out of his way to provoke that hatred. If heâ(TM)d just stick to his engineering and leave the anti-semitism to the professional bigots, heâ(TM)d generate a lot less blowback.

Gratuitous sexism aside, youâ(TM)re exactly correct with your comment.

We donâ(TM)t need machines that generate pro forma bullshit that mimics all the genuine bullshit weâ(TM)re already drowning in. We need machines that can reliably perform menial but important real-world tasks, like food preparation.

A bad developer is often worse than no developer, as the workload introduced by the bugs and maintenance load they add to the project outweighs the benefit of their coding effort.

Iâ(TM)d be very surprised if that doesnâ(TM)t turn out to be the case with Devin. At least with a badhuman programmer you can hold out hope that they will become better with time and experience; I donâ(TM)t think that is the case with AIs as they anre currently implemented.

Not tracking someone is bullying them . . . that's rich. Who is concerned about this? What did they say, and where did they say it? This sounds like the story of the woman suing Facebook for not serving her ads.

This "news" article's logic is so bizarre it sounds bought.

The lead wasnâ(TM)t evenly distributed, it was proportional to the amount of auto exhaust being emitted nearby.

Those who didnâ(TM)t live near lots of traffic were exposed to less lead than those who did.

Aerodynamics is a high priority only when efficiency is a concern. The other approach is to just ignore aerodynamics and add more battery to compensate for the resulting inefficiency, as seen in behemoths like the CyberTruck and Hummer EV.

A planet whose oceans are filled with a liquid that is almost, but not entirely, unlike tea.