Whatever you think you will achieve will be reversed by the spoiler effect, as others said, unless you get people in positions of power where they can help change FPTP voting system to something else nothing will change. until then 3rd party candidates will be nothing else than useful idiots to try to siphon votes from one of the sides

What a Unique and interesting thought, you are so much better than those people.

Why is this better than DBeaver?

Other than the fact that it mentions AI which makes it instantly infinitely worse?

Idiots who fall for Elon Musks genius persona and think they are smart also fall for crypto scams? Shocking I tell you, shocking

Both the first and second movie feels like they cut about 30 minutes from the middle, so I have 0 interest in this one.

A joke about shitty developers.

Dragon Age Origins, the trailers are the fucking best, I remember modding in the character from the trailer, they still give me goosebumps

https://youtu.be/GoEol-5Epfg?si=Y8uxr6F5mIZBCtEh

Are you a software developer ? Because you are way out of touch with what users want.

That’s just making a community reference with extra steps https://youtu.be/NMTQxCzStuw?si=3HIeDCTcgaFmBKGj

I personally don’t feel like spending 700 or how many euros to play beat saber on my ps5.

Other games that might be awesome in this is ones were you don’t need to move around but benefit from being able to look around, so flight sims, driving sims, but there the chair setups are better imo.

Can’t really think of much else, that’s why VR is on the decline, really limited number of fun games to be had, or it would require some paradigm shift, like a strategy game but you are playing on the inside of a globe, but then that game would have to survive on being a VR exclusive.

move along then

In my laic opinion no criteria for fair use is fulfilled here, so it would be really hard to argue that it would set some harsher precedent that exists, in real life proving someone wanted what looks like something else will be hard to prove as they would need either the exact prompt and then prove what the author meant by that point, IANAL but AFAIK proving what someone was thinking when entered the prompt will be pretty difficult or it will have to be something obvious like “make it a slightly different version of that iconic blade runner picture”

Here the court will have documents showing that they tried to get permission to use the picture when denied they used something that’s essentially the same thing while also livestreaming themselves mentioning what they are ripping off, so it’s a much different case to some random person generating a similar picture.

This to me is very close to the Kanye New Slaves case, feel free to listen to it then go on youtube and checkout “gyöngyhajú lány” while you will find that kanyes version is slightly different, he entirely ripped the song off, then tried get permission afterwards, which he didn’t get and had to settle for undisclosed millions.

But the fact that this is AI generated has nothing to do with anything, if you ask for the rights of an image from someone they deny you, then you mention the original image multiple times to promote your product using a hand drawn near copy you will be also in trouble, because what you are doing is rather clear to see and rather easy to prove you know you are in the wrong.

So you saying that anything AI generated that is similar to something else will get sued for copyright infringement makes no sense, unless you can already do that for hand drawn images.

I think the movie is quite explicit about the why, just not overt, they mention the president dismantling the FBI, i believe drone striking US citizens, Jesse Plemons character is clearly acting by the racist status quo.

Live action Civil War (2024) reenactment.

On one hand this is obvious, on the other hand when I mentioned to my friends that rising inequality leads to a rise in fascism they looked at me like I was an idiot, so the more info is out there the better.

I don’t get your comment, first it’s an argument that says, others are doing fucked up wrong things, therefore Elon is justified doing it too.

In the second paragraph you fear monger that anyone who creates anything remotely similar will be sued with no proof , but this case literally spells out that Elon first asked for the image, then used one similar anyway when denied, then mentioned the source in question twice in his speech.

It’s literally nothing like the thing you fearmonger about, how your comment got 17 upvotes is beyond me.

Username checks out, you are right, except if you first ask the sunset for their picture and they refuse to give it to you you come up with an eerily similar one, even with the person in the foreground wearing the same clothes

I think you are the cryptobro, how the fuck is likening crypto to a known stupid investment like gold make me a crypto bro you absolute muffin.

I use it to generate repetitive patterns that’s easy to guess what’s next, but PITA to write, eg. asserts in Unit tests