a user called "crypto-bitcoin" raises an issue with the World Wide Web Consortium's Accessibility List
Journal of Awful Studies
actually i feel a bit bad about it now https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-27/daniella-cult-the-family-joined-the-army-toxic-control/101895164
apparently she is a real known person from military twitter
it's always nice when a story just comes in on the twitter and nobody else has covered it yet
b-movie villain types sitting behind a desk
correct, academic publishing
it's Friday so I probably won't get an answer till Monday or Tuesday, but I did contact their press office asking about why the fuck NFTs in TYOOL twenty fucking twenty four and the sensitive issue of the art being facile plagiarism by an advertising executive
you sure about that?
The most depressing thing for me is the feeling that I simply cannot trust anything that has been written in the past 2 years or so and up until the day that I die. It's not so much that I think people have used AI, but that I know they have with a high degree of certainty, and this certainty is converging to 100%, simply because there is no way it will not. If you write regularly and you're not using AI, you simply cannot keep up with the competition. You're out. And the growing consensus is "why shouldn't you?", there is no escape from that.
This is someone who literally can't tell good writing from bad, so he assumes everyone is using AI
shocked that scorpions in a scorpion's nest funded by their scorpion mates might have fallen into stinging
PROSECUTOR, PROBATION SERVICE: look, even we think time served for this one
(Judge reads Caroline's book)
JUDGE: Jail for Caroline! Jail for Caroline for seven hundred and thirty days!
pumped: artificially inflated
my phone tries extra fucking hard to sell me on its built in wallpaper app which has data-scraping permissions out to here also
The image gatcha does not create a new copyright. There might be a copyright in the text of a complex prompt (do you feel lucky in court?) Mere "sweat of the brow" does not generate a new copyright in the US, so e.g. retouching work on a photo does not generate a new copyright and photos of a public domain artwork do not create a new copyright.
This doesn't touch on the old copyrights of the stuff Midjourney trained on to make its computer-mediated collages. Those copyrights still exist.
Does the computer-mediated collage launder the previous copyrights? The answer is "do you feel lucky in court?"