Most people I've seen using it as their personal pronoun would probably laugh if they were presented with an option for It with Cousin Itt representing it.
I would probably add an option for "thing" with a disembodied hand as well.
The fabled Blahaj cuddle pile.
That's exactly why it needs to be something you are willing to explain. It makes their stories better.
Straight shooter is an idiom meaning honest and straightforward or direct. Super is acting as an intensifier. Combined it means they are extremely honest and direct.
Awesome book too.
A woman has her own value and that value decreases by men looking at her.
I didn't know men had that kind of super power. The ability to decrease value of something just by looking at it. Can we harness this power to decrease home prices?
NPR reported that a "top concern" is that ChatGPT could use The Times' content to become a "competitor" by "creating text that answers questions based on the original reporting and writing of the paper's staff."
That's something that can currently be done by a human and is generally considered fair use. All a language model really does is drive the cost of doing that from tens or hundreds of dollars down to pennies.
To defend its AI training models, OpenAI would likely have to claim "fair use" of all the web content the company sucked up to train tools like ChatGPT. In the potential New York Times case, that would mean proving that copying the Times' content to craft ChatGPT responses would not compete with the Times.
A fair use defense does not have to include noncompetition. That's just one factor in a fair use defense and the other factors may be enyon their own.
I think it'll come down to how "the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes" and "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;" are interpreted by the courts. Do we judge if a language model by the model itself or by the output itself? Can a model itself be uninfringing and it still be able to potentially produce infringing content?
analysis of individual cases that could take up to two years.
They are already getting ready to drag their feet. The other policies announced here aren't much better. In particular:
Holders of women’s titles who change their genders to male would see those titles “abolished,” the federation said
There's no reason for that. What does transitioning have to do with past titles. It all reeks of transphobia.
Trans men tend to be shorter than the average man. Trans women tend to be taller than the average woman. A conference of trans men and trans women will have an extraordinary amount of short men and tall women.
Going off this India traffic police site same as a white curb. High visibility marking the edge of the road.
I don't think you have to prove loss sales for trademark disputes. Just a likelihood of confusion. And from the article:
As part of its marketing for the movie, Lucasfilm authorized Filson to run a cobranded campaign to promote the movie and the clothing company’s products, according to the suit. “Lucasfilm and Filson produced a 60 second commercial prominently featuring video clips from the Indiana Jones 5 film intertwined with video clips of actors using Filson’s own products,” writes Devin McRae, a lawyer for Frost River, in the complaint. “Shockingly, one of the intertwined video clips was one from Indiana Jones 5 featuring Frost River’s Geologist Pack.”
I think they might actually have a case. Use of one of their bags used in a lookalike competitors marketing campaign without clearly showing that it's theirs is probably infringement.
Lack of sales might be an argument to be made if we get to damages but I think this will probably be settled out of court for a nondisclosured amount. It'll probably be cheaper for both parties that way.
Whenever you see a post. And remember when you post it shows you your post so you must post after you post.