But Jayden Smith paid good money to be linked to metal listeners. Why won't you think of the marketing payments?

If you didn't try to steal copper, your brain wouldn't be fried and there'd have been one less power outage.

...You're sitting here comparing an Iroquois village with a larger landmass and a tenth of the population to a country, and then being aghast at the difference in scale. Besides, since when does your igloo need electricity?

Many open source licences require attribution and even more require the preservation of the licence.

Apple's macOS. Apple contributes code and employs some FreeBSD developers.

Its a little more complex. Apple does derive some of FreeBSDs userland and some services. However its a myth that the kernel is a modified FreeBS. Its a modified Mach microkernel, XNU (technically actually a hybrid, like most real world microkernels, that has a small amount of non core kernel in ring zero for performance reasons, that has some services that have FreeBSD derived code in it, namely the network stack, process model and IOKit.

Chinas single timezone is bonkers. If your in Beijing its great, but in those back end industrial cities, you've got the sun rising at 10am and setting at midnight. That would *massively* fuck with your sleep cycle and I half suspect that western regions probably got some of the highest rates of melatonin prescription..... and sleep disorders.... on the planet.

When everything is illegal, nothing is illegal, but an authoritarian government can enforce laws against anyone it likes. This isn't about stopping companion bots, it's about creating an excuse to stomp down on anyone They want who is using the latest tool.

There's no reason Slashdot would suddenly come down hard on "infringement" by AIs except misguided general anti-AI sentiment and consensus cracking. Some people don't like AI and have seized on this as a way to stop it. Some other people are paid to say these things, to create the illusion that there is consensus for strong copyright laws. But strong copyright laws hurt almost everyone and have gone far, far beyond their original justifications. Rent seeking owners of publishers are holding our culture hostage, and it's evil.

No. It is not copyright infringement, and there's no reason to hold copyright so sacred anyway. Are you seriously wanting to protect hundred year old fairy tails from being retold? Information wants to be free.

Nobody's going to lift a finger on our behalf. That's what the thieves are counting on. Which I guess explains the vigorousness of the music industry's response to "pirating" back in the day.

Training is "inherently transformative", and thus protected as fair use. BUT... Google should lose this.

The publishers have a contract with Google that spells out the specific purposes for which the materials are to be used. These are not books that Google purchased off-the-shelf. They were provided by the publishers for that specific use. Any other use -even an otherwise legal use is a violation of that contract.

Even if Google argues fair use in training their AI system, they violated the contract. Pay up.

Consolidate power and increase corporate profits! Let nothing stand in the way.

And how will allowing even more of the media to be owned by a single business help that? Honestly, this feels like clearing the way to make sure only the "correct" message is allowed out on mass media. And we all know that means more alternative facts and less actual reality.

Yeah, there's two main problems:

1) People entering the wrong fields. For example, medicine really needs workers, at all levels, but not enough people are going into it.

2) Certain manual labour fields, like field work and home construction, because... well, I think we all know why there's a shortage of workers in those fields.

Bluntly, PayPal steals money from people.

They freeze accounts: having taken the money from the buyer they refuse to release the money to the seller even though the product was received. They blame it on "irregularities", "potential violations", and "suspicious activity", while refusing to communicate specifics to the seller -they only send a form letter notifying you that your account is frozen. They count on sellers to not pursue arbitration over small amounts of money -and the fact that (when they were part of eBay) you would automatically lose your eBay account if you did.

When PayPal became part of eBay, it was required that sellers accept PayPal as payment. Once that ended, most sellers stopped accepting PayPal.

They may be less scummy now, but they earned their bad reputation.