yetAnotherUser

Nope, not in Germany. A 110 year old can legally bang a 14 year old, as long as they don't have a position of authority over the teen.

Not equivalent, it's more for drawing than image editing.

Also, it doesn't even have the green pepper brush.

How does that even make sense?

Wouldn't you lower the sentence if the victim AI says it forgives the killer? Because - you know - it significantly reduces the "revenge" angle the American justice system is based on?

You wouldn't have a notebook. Any and all stimuli would be banned as the purpose is making your experience horrible.

Also, you get incredibly mundane tasks as well. Maybe you'll get a couple sheets of random symbols and are tasked to count a certain letter. And if you don't do this task you can be laid off for underperforming.

Fully agree. Just wanted to provide an argument why having commercial truck drivers have some English proficiency could be beneficial for safety. Requiring a 3 month English course for those unfamiliar with the language as part of getting a CDL would do the trick. But that wouldn't hand money to private prisons, would it?

But the inconsistency is the problem.

Take a look at the top signs about driving on the shoulder. Who is to say there aren't twenty more variations?

Maybe a couple of

"Driving on shoulder mandatory"

"Trucks on shoulder only"

"Passing on shoulder permitted"

"$100 fine for driving on shoulder"

"Keep shoulder clear"

"No trucks allowed on shoulder"

There doesn't seem to be any standard. It's just text.

Doesn't the US have a shitton of unstandardized road signs which are just words?

I feel like you have to have some English proficiency to understand them.

AI is worthless if you are unable to tell hallucination from fact.

But just like NP hard problems, verifying a given solution is much easier than coming up with one yourself.

That's like the least noteworthy aspect of German anti-piracy action out there tbh.

There's an entire industry around identifying people who torrent and fining them 4 digit amounts as well as forcing them to sign a declaration never to pirate again in their lifetime (which, when broken, results in contractual fines a magnitude larger). Don't want to sign? Tough luck, have fun losing a lawsuit forcing you to sign it.

The cases where large companies do win won't make news though. "Large companies settles with individual" isn't really headline material now, is it?

Also, small companies != people. Neither me nor you are a company and even small companies have significantly more resources available to them than someone who just created the next Lord of the Rings and didn't see a penny.

There are significantly more companies who would rather start killing politicians than see IP law gone. They rake in billions of shareholder value, much moreso than any AI company out there.

I never argued that copyright law is necessarily wrong or bad just because we went millenia without it. What I am arguing is that these laws do not allow people to create intellectual works as people in the past were no less artistic than we are today - maybe even moreso.

Have you seen the impact of IP law on science? It's horrible. No researcher sees any money from their works - rather they must pay to lose their "rights" and have papers published. Scientific journals have hampered scientific progress and will continue to do so for as long as IP law remains. I would not be surprised if millions of needless deaths could have been prevented if only every medical researcher had access to research.

IP law serves solely large companies and independent artists see a couple of breadcrumbs. Abolishing IP law - or at the very least limiting it to a couple of years at most - would have hardly any impact on small artists. The vast, vast, VAST majority of artists make hardly any money already. Just check Bandcamp or itch.io and see how many millions of artists there are who will never ever see success. They do not benefit from IP law - so why should we keep it for the top 0.1% of artists who do?

The rich want to do it because of AI. That's it.

They can already take whatever you create wihout giving you a dime. What are you gonna do, sue a multi-billion dollar company with a fleet of attorneys on standby? With what money?

They would certainly just settle and give you a pittance just about large enough to cover your attorney fees.

Do you know why companies usually don't do this? Because they have sufficiently many people hired who do nothing but create stories for the company full time. They do not need your ideas.

Copyright didn't exist for millenia. It didn't stop authors from writing books.

Not quite. Reuploading is at the very least an annoying process.

Uploading anything over Tor is a gruelling process. Downloading takes much time already, uploading even more so. Most consumer internet plans aren't symmetrically either with significantly lower upload than download speeds. Plus, you need to find a direct-download provider which doesn't block Tor exit nodes and where uploading/downloading is free.

Taking something down is quick. A script scraping these forums which automatically reports the download links (any direct-download site quickly removes reports of CSAM by the way - no one wants to host this legal nightmare) can take down thousands of uploads per day.

Making the experience horrible leads to a slow death of those sites. Imagine if 95% of videos on [generic legal porn site] lead to a "Sorry! This content has been taken down." message. How much traffic would the site lose? I'd argue quite a lot.