The US is a bit special. It is the only state to require its citizens pay taxes to it on (regular) earnings abroad. Other places only tax earnings made inside their own borders.

So to truly be off the hook for American taxes as a non-elite, you’ll have to renounce your citizenship.

Of course they would. Not only would they get their hands on data users fully voluntarily give them by using their platform, but they’d get their hands on verified IDs and quite reliable family tie information. The potential loss of users is definately worth it for them (from their perspective).

Largely depends on the country. Most countries prosecute only crimes commited in their territory (including ships/planes in/above international waters sailing/flying under their flag) or sometimes even by their citizens outside it. There are always exceptions to these rules. As per the meme, think of them more as guidelines that are followed most of the time.

That being said, this example is within the EU, meaning other EU members are obliged to arrest the person and send then to the country that asked for them. There are also various other extradition treaties under which the person can be brought before Dutch courts.

Also, AFAIK ‘capital’ crimes in US lingo are those punishable by death. Since no EU members and only one country in Europe outside it actively retains death as a valid penalty for a crime, this would be closer to a felony in the US. The EU is similar to the US in that regard - EU member states are obliged just like US states to turn over people with a properly published arrest warrant. However, there are no “federal” courts in the EU and “federal” crimes like in the US, at least not in the way as they exist in the US.

If reddit was a thing before Photoshop was around, I assume they’d block not only that too, but stuff like changing hue, exposure, etc.

Isn’t that illegal?

The content (i.e. text, tables, images, etc. ) of the book is under copyleft, while the only thing the publisher can argue that’s theirs is the design (cover, font, copyright claim text, etc.) There are things like page layout and stuff that may’ve been created by the author or the publishers so it’s in a grey area.

All in all, I think scanning the book and OCRing it, removing stuff like page numbers and those first few pages of junk would remove all “infringing” elements.

Or, as always, you can email tye author and they’re 99% sure to give you their manuscript directly if they didn’t publish it somewhere else already.

I merely said something designed formedical use is probably easier to breathe tbhough than something designed for military use. Y’know, thick materials are harder to breathe through. Wouldn’t want a wild boar, terrorist or immigrant tearing through it to reveal your identity.

So it’s probably harder to breathe through a bandit mask that than a thin little surgical one.

Oh yes, specially designed masks for MEDICAL purposes, designed to be usable for childreb abd the elderly are harder to breathe through for tough macho guys like this than some bullshit they bought at a gunstore.

Clearly they only care about protecting themselves and can’t be bothered to protect others.

No it doesn’t because all mastodon data is public and does not require ToS agreement to be collected.

ToS are legalese bullshit. They mean next to nothing since most stuff if it comes to court, gets annuled.

ToS kind of does protect you, but holding tge service hostage or not (as in you can’t watch one little youtube video without selling your soul to Google) doesn’t make a big difference - rrasonable expectations are that users own their content (as is the case in youtube’s case - youtube doesn’t ponce on your videos afaik), although they do own rights to distributing it (obviously), and using sane technological measures to prevent what they don’t want. In youtube’s case that’s watching e.g. privated videos, and in another case it can be AI scrapers.

Robots.txt is, just like a ToS, a contract. It just isn’t legalese as it isn’t meant to scare people, but be useful to programmers making the site and those using the scraper. They’re programmers, not marketers or lawyers, of course they won’t deal with legalese if they csn avoid it.

Again, law is not leagese.

A robots.txt file is a contract by use,like when you park in a charge zone - entering the zone, you accept the obigation to pay.

When you scrape a site you first check for robots.txt in all the reasonable places it should be, look for its terms, and follow them… If you don’t want to riskgetting sued.

Similarily, entering a store, you are expected to pay for what you take. There is no entry machine like on a metro where you, instead if swiping a card, read the store’s T&C’s, but know that it’s common sense security will come after you, if not the police. Yet you clicked no “I agree”? How come you don’t just take what you want?

And robots.txt is a mature technology and easily a “standard”. Any competent lawyer will point that out to the jury and judge, who will most likely rule appropristely. The Internet is not the Wild West anymore.

Or maybe it’s trained on some SF. Any agents like ScubaGPT are always self-preserving in such stories.

ChatGPT is not sentient, it doesn’t feel, it doesn’t have thoughts. It has regurgitation and hallucinations.

ChatGPT isn’t sentient, doesn’t feel or have thoughts. It has <insert equally human behavior here>

While I agree with what you mean, I’d just like to point out that “hallucinations” is just another embellished word like the ones you critique - were AI to have real hallucinations, it would need to think and feel. Since it doesn’t, its “hallucinations” are hallucinations only to us.

Press the Start button. The React Native app doesn’t… React.

The ship’s main computer and all its systems crash - every single fancy monitor shows the same BSoD.

Since the doors are all electronic, due to safety concerns on Earth that have gotten overlooked while making the craft, all the doors release and open.

You see the smiley faces and QR codes dissapearing as the monitors get yanked out into the void.

You soon follow.

The child having no money is not a problem.

Children are easily influenced and gullible.

A child will pester their parents to buy what they want, potentially for weeks.

Bombarding children with some product, even if for “grown-ups” can make them like it in the future when they’re grown up themselves. It is a very long-term strategy, but it does work since people tend to associate brands from their childhood with quality.

But I agree. Ads directed at kids always seemed distasteful to me, vut it was usually mixed in with “normal” TV or even YouTube ads. But now, when you can’t open a video on YouTube and have it play minimized because it’s “for kids”, you’d expect Google’d also make the ads at least less distasteful than on TV or “grownup” YouTube.

And the 7-day free trian totally will not become a 2 year subscription which costs more to cancel than keep, and the price will not be 3x the sticker price had you just gotten to the “buy” option. We’re a legit business!

Excel probably does too.

Oh, it got the concept very right. Most people want a white Jesus. And by “most”, I mean those with access to AI.

Why sould felings care for such tiny details as facts and historical accuracy?

You forgot all the Bing Chats in between.

And as a poor person, every cent counts. That’s why you claim the maximum (or a bit more than you think you’ll ve given), since it’s the government’s job to actually calculate how much you’re “better off” than the other person and adjust the rates accordingly. Ideally, you’d just request something and get that something - you shouldn’t have to be the one to decide how miserable your misery is compared to other miseries.

Someone on benefits, especially someone caring for their sick child shouldn’t be an accounting expert. This isn’t the US, where 15 year olds are expected to do their own taxes (and pay a $15.000 service that does about 10% of the work for you), and even in the US if you fuck up the IRS mostly just tells you to cover the difference.

So, this system of “you dared to ask for ONE CENT MORE? Now you owe me ALL back” is not only asinine, but it doesn’t even fly in the US of all places.

If we want to punish people, then ask for, say, 2% interest on the overclaim. Taking ALL is more discriminatiry, since it rewards trying to claim an ungodly amount and hoping one of your £15k claims somehow goes under the radar.

All in all, not a good system.

Using something proportional would be a progressivs disincentive, and it will keep actual “accidental” overclaimants better off than malicious ones.

You could also open a 2nd restaurant if the first does too well - just say you use it to make your great food accessible to more people and to test new products before risking your reputation. The part about “I want me some cash to mix in some of my dirty money” can be strategically left out.

He’s the US VP.

I’d love if this was a joke.

Surprisingly a lot of clauses in EULAS are and get “stricken” (even though this one still stands).