it is that they didn’t pay for the books they read, like people are supposed to do legally.
If I can read a book from a library, why shouldn't OpenAI or anybody else?
...but yes from what I've heard they (or whoever, don't remember) actually trained on libgen. OpenAI can be scummy without the general process of feeding AI books you only have read access to being scummy.
So you would rather Ukrainians lay down their weapons and we'll have 20 years of Bucha and Holodomor, again? I somehow doubt you would prefer that to continued warfare, more likely thinking "war is awful" is taking precedence over "not fighting it would be a hell a lot worse". But that's why wars are, by and large, fought: Because people think that not doing it would be worse. Some because they're nuts, some, like Ukrainians, because they're spot-on.
The only party which can lay down their weapons and not get absolutely kicked in the face for it is Russia. Every minute it continues is on them.
It’s about trying to prevent the worst and most horrific actions and outcomes that happen during war.
No. It's about trying to prevent militarily unnecessary worst and most horrific actions and outcomes.
White Phosphorus as incendiary rounds,
Perfectly legal. You can't use them as chemical rounds (they're shit at that anyways), or, as any other incendiary weapons, close to civilians. By far the most common use is as tracer rounds and in smokescreens, though.
The allied carpet-bombings of Nazi Germany caused untold suffering, but they were necessary to break the German will to fight.
Nope. Morale bombing by and large doesn't work and that's why it's illegal now. On the flipside you have German Nazis use that and say "Look at all those allied war crimes" -- but they weren't war crimes at the time. And the Nazis very much started with the bombing campaigns.
The vast majority of them could simply not have volunteered. Also, you can surrender.
Mustard gas is ineffective. That is the actual reason it's outlawed: The opposing force dons gas masks, completely negating the effect, the only stuff that it still kills is collateral damage. That's precisely what happened during WWI: It made everything nastier without actually having an impact on the strategic level.
There's this notion among many people that the Geneva convention is about preventing cruelty or something, not at all: It's about preventing pointless cruelty. Cruelty that does not actually serve a military objective. War is hell, that's already a given.
The Wolfsburg-based manufacturer on Monday informed its works council
Goshdarnit Guardian. You mean management, as in the CEO, informed the board, which has 50% - 1 seats allocated to the works council. Who already expressed their preference for the CEO to shove it. Then we have the seats representing the state stake (Lower Saxony owns 20%), which let it be known, somewhat more statesmanlike, that "the question of works closures won't arise because every other option will be exhausted first".
My prediction? If the CEO doesn't clearly communicate that "those were of course theoretical considerations unlikely to have practical relevance" there's going to be a new CEO.
Their load balancers are at least bound to have dedicated addresses, maybe IP range was a bit overzealous.
In any case it's not going to be an issue of blocking port 80 on one IP and finding out that it serves five hundred semi-unrelated domains. Unrelated short of all using the same wordpress or whatnot hoster, that is.
Order was amended, that's not longer the case. If you copy+paste an order saying that, say, Chiquita can't do business in Brazil any more you'd also attach such conditions, that Brazilian companies are forbidden from circumventing the ban by making business with Chiquita outside of Brazil. So it's more of a "oh that part doesn't make sense in this case" situation, not "let me come up with something extraordinary to make things worse".
Blocking things without outlawing VPN access is quite easy: Tell ISPs to take twitter off their DNS servers, with infrastructure the size of twitter you can also blackhole their whole IP range so they're unreachable even if you use a non-brazilian DNS server.
Blocking VPNs? Well you could tell VPNs that they're ISPs and also need to block twitter for their Brazilian customers. That'd actually make sense. Wouldn't affect the likes of tor at all.
Well without that they would've needed probably months correlating things like "goes to bed at X o clock" with those chat logs. For a whole neighbourhood to then get a search warrant with that. Which of course is not above the capabilities of a state actor but depending on how big a fish he was they might not have bothered spending the resources. Being able to pin-point a house in maybe a day when all you have is a municipality is a whole different ballpark.
I’m interested in how they got their suspects narrowed down that drastically in the first place.
They listened in on the chat he was in and could glean from chatter that he lived in a particular municipality or something, rough area. Stuff like, dunno, complain that the supermarket is closed because they had a water leak or something and pin-pointing that. The rest was driving around and see if anything correlates roughly, then park there long enough to make that correlation court-proof.
They don't keep copies and learning speed? Why one day? Does it count if I skim through a book?