I was thinking the catch here would be that these people were bribing their way into schools in order to teach their own weird religious creationism shit or anti LGBT whatever.
That’s not a catch. That would improve their hire rates for Texas school districts if they listed it on their resumes.
That’s a feature btw, not a bug. If you go to the hospital with a pacemaker malfunction or we’re trying to do cardioversion in a way the pacemaker doesn’t do itself the only way we can turn it off is with a big magnet. That’s why most ED and cardiac units have one for an emergency.
It’s a weird low angle shot. US open supposedly. He’s actually in Diddy’s shadow and since there’s no depth of field reference since the camera is looking up the lighting looks very strange.
Another from the same event
So it’s the person you’re suing. Essentially, it’s a civil case like a car accident, but you’re suing someone for going into the wrong bathroom. You’re guaranteed a $10k judgement but can get more for “emotional damages” if the judge is a particular bigot.
Edit: it also means you can blackmail a trans person for a settlement and that’s legal too, since the threat isn’t so much the criminal fine but the civil one
The fine is a criminal statute of $500. The bounty is a civil statute of $10,000.
Actually the fine is $500 at most. This is a guaranteed civil court payout, on top of any “damages” someone may receive. And since this is civil court, you operate on preponderance of evidence instead of beyond a reasonable doubt.
This sort of legislated punitive damages is what should be happening for instances of wage theft, but instead we’re using it for harassing trans people while wage theft tends to have few if any punitive damages and mostly amounts to “ok, now give them their paycheck.”
It was definitely tennis. Tennis had a lot of gambling involved. This was the time they were banning theaters too.
Yeah. Even the king lost money betting on tennis.
Tennis was a spectator sport, which meant a great opportunity to show off your skills and to gamble! Both players and spectators could bet on the outcome, with the privy expenses showing that even the King could get it wrong. Between 1493 and 1499, Henry VII lost a total of £20
https://onthetudortrail.com/Blog/resources/life-in-tudor-england/tennis-in-tudor-times/
They kept trying to ban it in the city of London.
Just gotta be a liefull gamer.
Does your tamogatchi encourage you to commit suicide so you can join it and demand it be the only important thing in your life while sexting you? These are things that if the adult human programmer did, they would be liable both criminally and civilly. Just being AI doesn’t give it a free pass.
Holy fuck, that model straight up tried to explain that it was a model but was later taken over by a human operator and that’s who you’re talking to. And it’s good at that. If the text generation wasn’t so fast, it’d be convincing.
So are you saying yes or no that changing the medium from a book to a movie, which completely alters how the work is consumed, is fair use transformative or not? Because it would be very informative to how far off the copyright test that the supreme court has handed down you are.
See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_v._Koons for changes in media (photograph to sculpture) with alterations and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Warhol_Foundation_for_the_Visual_Arts,_Inc._v._Goldsmith for a more recent case where an upper body back and white photograph was cropped to only included a head, transformed to silk screen, and colored by hand if you want a clear idea here as to whether minor cropping and figure redrawing for engraving in a different medium is considered transformative(it is not).
So if I produce a movie based on a book without a license, I would be ok in your mind right?
Changing medium is not transformative if you’re explicitly copying the subject matter of the original.
Edit: one thing that is funny is that there’s a note in the picture of the article that they can’t use a photo of the back of the watch for some watch review site because they don’t have the rights from the AP. In that case, however, they’re wrong because a picture of the back of the watch to make a point that the watch is similar to the original photograph is, hilariously, transformative. It, in conjunction with the article, has a completely different meaning than the original image and is fair use. If you used the image just to talk about the event or about Trump though, that would not be fair use because you’re just using the image’s composition in its entirety.
Which was settled out of court with a sharing of rights to the AP. And that image was more transformative than this. Cropping the subject of a photograph and engraving it on the back of a watch just conveys the subject matter of the photograph. It’s a loser in court.
That’s not transformative by a long shot. It adds no new meaning and is for commercial purposes which has a higher bar in the first place.
Obviously I’m not pro Taliban or this, but one thing that has been amusing me has been the US institute for peace decrying the fact that they outlawed poppy production again because it increases poverty. Western media on the subject is a mixture of it’s bad and it won’t work (they’ve actually reduced poppy production by over 90 percent though). Pre war we were justifying sanctions due to heroin production, post war it actually increased under American administration and the fragile kleptocracy we encouraged(which “banned” poppy production), and now it’s bad they’re slashing and burning poppy fields.
https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/06/talibans-successful-opium-ban-bad-afghans-and-world
Oh nobody’s predicting net positive fusion anytime soon. There’s huge materials hurdles in both magnetic confinement and inertial confinement while also regenerating tritium. Neutron radiation just does not play nice.
Won’t run on my 386? Well what good is it then.