![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0e5ca009-f2dd-493c-ae7b-44a86b83455e.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
Half of your argument is just saying, “nu-uh” over and over again without any valid counterpoints.
Half of your argument is just saying, “nu-uh” over and over again without any valid counterpoints.
In the same way that a person can learn the material and also use that knowledge to potentially plagiarize it, though. It’s no different in that sense. What is different is the speed of learning and both the speed and capacity of recall. However, it doesn’t change the fundamental truths of OP’s explanation.
Also, when you’re talking specifically about music, you’re talking about a very limited subset of note combinations that will sound pleasing to human ears. Additionally, even human composers commonly struggle to not simply accidentally reproduce others’ work, which is partly why the music industry is filled with constant copyright litigation.
For summarization, having the data correct is crucial because manual typing itself is not a large chore. AI tends to shine more when you’re producing a lot of manual labor such as a 10-page document for something. At that point, the balance tips the other way where proofing and correcting is much easier and less time-consuming than the production itself. That’s where AI comes in for the gains in workflows. It has other fantastic uses as well, like being another voice for brainstorming ideas. If done well, you’re not taking the AI’s idea so much as just using it to spur more creative thinking on your end.
Like everything else in the real world, there are far more shades of gray than the singular black and white way of handling things than how you’re representing it. Stop for a moment and think about your own actions growing up, going to school, getting a job, being in a relationship, etc. In every scenario, I guarantee you’ve made mistakes or poor decisions of varying degrees. I also guarantee you that some of those were abuses of power, even if most of them were very small ones. Being caught making those mistakes doesn’t always have to end in a 100% revocation of whatever power or potential power you have. Good responses tend to take into account all the nuance, including stakes and severity, and punishment is often used only as a tool of reinforcement that then lets the person have the opportunity to later show that they can and have grown and won’t make the mistake again. That is what’s happening here. If they do something like this again, even and especially with the changes being made, then yeah, it’s time for further action. Until then, the actions themselves that were harmful have been reversed and they’ve taken the time and effort to make the changes they described. Let them learn and grow.
TL;DR: You don’t get put to death for every crime, even many bigger ones; you get a measured response and an opportunity to grow.
That’s rad, bro.
160 ish what, gold? Not even close.
What are you? Some kind of tape leg?
Incorrect. He has to have a reason for the appeal trial to be approved. His lawyers can file an appeal on any grounds they see fit. That then has to be processed, which takes time. But I’ll fall back to the answer that I already gave as well, if he’s given a sentence that includes any sort of time to serve, his lawyers will use that as a basis for appeal, which is clearly stated as a possible reason for an appeal to be approved.
You’re operating on a fallacy. You can only be tried and convicted once per crime. Every single one is an opportunity for an appeal. Having more just increases the likelihood that there will be at least some possible appeal. The easiest route will probably be an appeal against whatever the sentence itself is once that’s issued, especially if he’s sentenced to serve time. But it doesn’t matter; his lawyers will simply look for every single possible way to delay the process, as they have continuously done.
One would hope.
Exactly. I’m not defending Trump in any way shape or form. But spreading misinformation, disregarding nuance, and ignoring factual details is dangerous and exactly what Republican politicians want. We need to be better than that as a nation.
No, he had a sexual abuse charge, not rape. None of the above was a criminal charge, only civil.
While that may mean there is a technical component to it, that’s not what people mean when they’re thinking about it. Being put into a prison is what people are referring to and that isn’t likely to happen.
It’s not like Trump is going to prison for this. He’s old, has no record, and did serve as president, regardless of how people feel about it. Plus, he’s going to appeal, which means this thing will drag on long enough to still not matter, sadly.
I don’t disagree but that’s less of a problem with good writing where the ad isn’t forced or obvious…in fact, it can be much more effective if done that way versus taking you out of the moment and shoving the product in your face like “BUY THIS” during the middle of a touching scene. But at least with The Price is Right, it’s just a gameshow and not some sort of drama or whatever.
So many people want to boil everything down to a soundbite or a singularity. The reality is that the creation of the show was probably multifaceted, with product sponsorship being one part of it and entertainment being another, which is why the show does what you mentioned. It is both fun and an up-front ad for products.
,…and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with either or both. It is okay to sell shit and it’s okay to have fun. At least there are some people out there like yourself who get that. Sometimes I lose faith because there seem to be so few who do.
Using a well established name for a web-based thing, see gleam.io, is probably not the best idea.
I use the Logitech MX Vertical. https://a.co/d/9eDjEZ8
Took a little getting used to, but the wrist pain is gone and the mouse is reliable.
That knowledge is out of date and out of touch. While it’s possible to expose small bits of training data, that’s akin to someone being able to recall a portion of the memory of the scene they saw. However, those exercises essentially took what sometimes equates to weeks or months of interrogation method knowledge gained over time employed by people looking to target specific types of responses. Think of it like a skilled police interrogator tricking a toddler out of one of their toys by threatening them or offering them something until it worked. Nowadays, that’s getting far more difficult to do and they’re spending a lot more time and expertise to do it.
Also, consider how complex a dragonfly is and how young this technology is. Very little in tech has ever progressed that fast. Give it five more years and come back to laugh at how naive your comment will seem.