Why would anyone pay for a web browser? Seriously, why? In 35 years of web browsers, only dopes paid for them.

ahh these young kids donâ(TM)t remember Digitial Electronic Corporation, makers of legendary DEC Alpha CPU.

Itâ(TM)s in its name. SERP = Search Engine Results Page. Theyâ(TM)re scrapes of Google SERPs. This is fallout from the Reddit license where Reddit decided to collect rent from Google and others for scraping their content. Apparently Reddit and Google decided to put Google only visible stuff on their pages (which is explicitly illegal under Googleâ(TM)s TOS, and has resulted in index banning) and then served up this secret content via SerpAPI.

Scraping Google SERPs has been standard behavior for literally as long as Google has existed. Thatâ(TM)s literally how Facebook, Microsoft, and countless startups and academics evaluate their own search engines. Iâ(TM)m not exaggerating. They literally compare their results to Google results, which always made me wonder what Google does.

As far as ignoring robots.txt and using different IPs? Please. Thatâ(TM)s also has been standard behavior for as long as the web has been around.

This is monopoly behavior, and Google is openly engaging in it and attacking the open web because thereâ(TM)s a sympathetic White House administration for them.

Il really trying ting to understand whatâ(TM) theyâ(TM)re alleging that hasnâ(TM)t been standard practice (even by Google) for literally as long as the web has existed.

Honestly, this sounds like textbook monopoly behavior.

10 years for this is bullshit.
Like all computer crimes, the estimated damage is grossly inflated. This doesnâ(TM)t even sound like the damage typical of a ransomware attack.

The guy is getting screwed.

No. There will always be jobs. Stupid jobs that pay nothing, but there will always be jobs. Why? Because having people you control is a kink for the oligarchs.

Thatâ(TM)s it. Itâ(TM)s about slavery. Never expect UBI, as long as billionaires exist. They want to keep you poor, weak, and most importantly *dependent*.

Bruh. Thatâ(TM)s literally how passports work. They work with visas, and visa free travel agreements.

Did you think TFA was going to be about how many grams the cardstock the cover is made out of can support? Seriously, what do you think âoea powerful passportâ means? Itâ(TM)s where you can travel without visas.

I donâ(TM)t know if the Internet feels like Philadelphia, but I will say it feels like Itâ(TM)s Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Even this sounds like Charlie asking if Pittsburgh is part of Philadelphia.

I have been saying for decades now that the F-1 (student) visa should be able to convert to a resident visa upon graduation.

The whole idea of it not being a resident visa was a cold war notion that after graduating, the international student would return to their country and spread the gospel of how wonderful the United States was, and how their local country needed to oppose the Soviets. I doubt that ever really happened.

Today, weâ(TM)re just training people and then at best turning them into indentured servants for a few oligarchs, or even worse (and now the policy of the Trump administration), throwing them out so theyâ(TM)ll build up some other competing country, while weakening our own.

So heâ(TM)s going to sue because he doesnâ(TM)t like the *editorial* recommendations?

Iâ(TM)m glad the self proclaimed defender of free speech is defending free speech.

No, that's a bad idea. A menu bar at the top of the screen is a much bigger target to hit, and easy to find by muscle memory. The file menu is always in the same place, regardless of what app you're using, and the buttons extend infinitely up above the screen. By contrast, a menu bar tied to the window moves around whenever the window moves, so you always have to visually find it again, and target size is just the size of the button and ends at the top of the window.

The whole âoeitâ(TM)s super dangerousâ thing served two purposes. First, it hyped the product. It must be earth shattering if itâ(TM)s super dangerous. Second, it was a naked play for government regulation to protect them from competition.

The irony of course is that they played up Skynet, the real societal danger was never going be stopped through regulation. The danger I speak of is that of generated content being taken as truth, whether itâ(TM)s propaganda or just lazy danger like putting glue on pizzas or misidentifying mushrooms.

But of course theyâ(TM)re not concerned with that. That makes money, and anyway, it will get better⦠eventually.

Itâ(TM)s âoequid pro quoâ not âoequid pre quoâ. ;)
If you get the money after the act, then itâ(TM)s not a bribe, but merely a thank you gift!

Yeah, that's the position of the copyright office.:

The guidance goes on to instruct applicants for copyright registration to "disclose the inclusion of AI-generated content in a work submitted for registration and to provide a brief explanation of the human author's contributions to the work" and "AI-generated content that is more than de minimis should be explicitly excluded from the application."

It's a test case. Specifically, he tried to register the copyright in the work naming the AI system as the author, and himself as the owner of a work-for-hire. The copyright office refused registration, because AIs can't be authors, and therefore there was no human author. He may well own the output, but it's not subject to copyright.