They tried to draw the lines with Photoshop, and with cameras, and with pre-mixed pigments, and probably more.
They tried to draw the lines with Photoshop, and with cameras, and with pre-mixed pigments, and probably more.
I mean, literally yes, though?
Like, it’s not meaningful at all, but yes, it’s copyrightable.
I mean, everyone knows writing isn’t art. It takes no skill to make something meaningful out of words.
I mean, I don’t believe you?
Only the names have changed.
I play with AI image generation all the time. No way do I see that as my work, there’s no skill other than positive and negative prompts, maybe feeding it a a starter image set or something.
I play with image editing software all the time. There’s no skill other than adding or changing marks, maybe using a reference or something.
Wanna bet their answer is “no”?
And it would still be worlds better than the worst ICE cars, it would only be worse than average.
Even just a hand grenade is probably plenty. Or a particularly expensive firework.
It is hilarious to me that there’s an encyclopedia entry for this. MAGA probably already thinks Wikipedia is woke trash or whatever.
Come on, name one time he’s ever lied before. You can’t even name two. There’s not even a dozen times. Certainly it’s less than a hundred? A thousand?
ETA: Wikipedia says it’s nearly 31000 just while he was president, if you count false or misleading, still more than 5000/2.5 yr if you only count outright falsehoods.
Well, he can’t use the song anymore, so he’s allowed to back down now. That’s just the rules.
How does it ever change?
I don’t know. But I’m going to keep trying.
I’m definitely going to vote, and everyone willing to listen should hear why, like you said.
But I’m also going to keep talking and listening to the people I disagree with, and nuts to your therapist.
Again, I agree with you. I just see the danger of refusing to acknowledge how a group conceptualizes their own position, even if they’re being deliberately blind to other factors.
And I wish people could spend more effort trying to understand each other’s perspectives, because otherwise how does it ever change?
I’m only barely talking about pro-life/anti-choice or pro-choice/pro-death here, too. The same kind of thinking and focusing on aspects the other person isn’t addressing is everywhere in discourse these days. And a lot of them are very close to home for me and I guess I want them to be able to consider my perspective. But they won’t, because they think of the world this way, so they see me as a problem and a problem-causer just by being me.
Any way… Rant over I guess
On the one hand, I absolutely think it’s worth calling out. On the other hand, they’ll often be very quick to try and turn it around on you, calling anyone pro-choice pro-death or saying they “want to kill babies”.
Obviously those aren’t quite the same thing, but they see it as the same and I just wish there was a way to bridge that gap and have everyone listen to each other…
I don’t think anyone said they were only looking at local viri. The original comment said (emphasis mine)
Of course, the reason the facility is there in the first place is because Wuhan province is a place where a lot of viruses originate naturally (in bat colonies), so it makes sense you research the viruses close to their natural reservoir.
So Wuhan was ideal because it’s where a lot of viri originate. That doesn’t imply they only looked at viri from nearby just that the location was chosen because there were so many nearby.
“Donbas Cowboy” sounds like text you’d get from an image generator you asked to show you a Texas football team.
I don’t have any information to add one way or the other, but it kinda sounds like you’re saying the fact that one bat-bourne illness was found elsewhere, it’s impossible that Wuhan has many or any such viruses too, which seems pretty fallacious.
Not realistically, no. It’s just about the same amount of difficulty.
A licence isn’t a copyright, though?