Depends on location, but I don’t think I’m too bad.
It’s the same builders that build the cheap homes
What cheap homes? No one is building those these days, other than maybe Habitat for Humanity and companies making mobile/prefab homes.
Ron was happy to cash a fat Netflix check for his bullshit memoir, now shocked he ignored all the signs Vance was an asshole.
The don’t have a plan to fix ANY crisis. Or problem.
Republicans have only a few plans:
But that is just it. When a commercial enterprise is literally saving copyrighted content and car reproduce it on demand, copyright holders have every right to object. Either use public domain materials and/or license copyrighted materials, or don’t try to make money off AI.
Not many. And generally not book passages or whole NY Post articles. That’s the point. OP claims it tosses the original, but it doesn’t.
This process is akin to how humans learn by reading widely and absorbing styles and techniques, rather than memorizing and reproducing exact passages. The AI discards the original text, keeping only abstract representations in “vector space”.
Citation needed. I’m pretty sure LLMs have exactly reproduced copyrighted passages. And considering it can created detailed summaries of copyrighted texts, it obviously has to save more than “abstract representations.”
Vegans causing controversy. This is my complete lack of surprise.
In Nov 2020, the person that ran things for years died, and control passed to other family members that immediately sued each other.
I’m any case, seems greed likely started to drive everything, they pushed expansion over safety, and wound up killing people.
She was targeted because it was spread falsely she had XY chromosomes and had high testosterone, not that she was North African. Rowling has had plenty of hate for white trans people.
Another thing MBAs have destroyed as they try to slightly increase profits.
Litter wasn’t the problem. It was producing a persistent single use product that has to go somewhere. A landfill is only mildly better than on the side of the road.
Glass bottles, which are far more reusable and recyclable, would be better, not worse.
The famous ad with the Native American crying about litter? It was literally funded by the single use plastic industry to shift the blame from them producing trash to people not throwing things away. Also, the guy was Italian.
Nationalization means the government takes full control of an industry, not merely sets standards on their purchase.
And buyers are able to have any reason they want for their purchase decisions, including optics. It’s still the invisible hand. And besides, I think it’s more than optics to want American tax dollars to go to Americans.
Capitalism doesn’t mean “always buy the cheapest.” It means anyone can sell at any price and quality, and the people choose. And, in my experience, Chinese made goods are often of lower quality, made with poor environmental standards, and produced with questionable labor practices (including outright slave labor).
Considering this only covers US Government purchased flags, this IS the invisible hand of the market. It’s a consumer choosing where they want to purchase products.
And it is t nationalizing the industry. They still will be privately produced. And individual Americans can still by Chinese flags.
Senator Brown is a great senator and literally the only statewide Democrat we have other than a few state Supreme Court justices (who will be out soon now that Republicans added party affiliation to the court ballot). He will be far better for America than Bernie Moreno.
I don’t know that he has refused, but he definitely allowed Russia to play him like a fiddle in having him publish the DNC hack (and let’s not forget, it was a hack, not a leak) while holding on to RNC hacked data.
I have questions on if Trump wins in 2016 without Assange, and that’s enough to make me hate him.
This case isn’t about a fed, it’s a local official.
There are other rules governing most federal employees. This is only one specific federal criminal law.
People are way overreacting to this. This decision was 100% about a federal statute. Unaffected are the MANY, MANY state and local laws preventing state and local government employees from taking gifts.
Edit: for y’all downvoters, even the linked article states
In any event, the decision in *Snyder *is narrow. It does not rule that Congress could not ban gratuities. It simply rules that this particular statute only reaches bribes.
One is my name. The other is not.