conciselyverbose
Under drive averages, points per drive is the best indicator of offensive performance from any of those. Comparing turnovers vs takeaways is OK too.
Advanced stats are better.
I'm saying it's sold in sticks. The recipe is always cups or tablespoons, but 2 sticks is a cup and tablespoons are marked on the wrapper to just cut off.
Seeing how other pictures are framed is exactly identical to seeing how other stories are written.
If they've seen prior art, yes, they are. It's literally not possible to be exposed to the history of art and not have everything you output be derivative in some manner.
Processing and learning from copyrighted material is not restricted by current copyright law in any way. It cannot be infringement, and shouldn't be able to be infringement.
We do sticks so it's not that much of an issue.
But flour? The difference between sifted and packed is huge, it makes a huge structural difference, and people have genuinely written recipes measured pretty far across the range on density.
There is literally not one single piece of art that is not derived from prior art in the past thousand years. There is no theoretical possibility for any human exposed to human culture to make a work that is not derived from prior work. It can't be done.
Derivative work is not copyright infringement. Straight up copying someone else's work directly and distributing that is.
It's absurdly easier with a scale. I don't know why the US standardizes to volume.
It's complete and utter nonsense and they're bad people for writing it. The complexity of the AI does not matter and if it did, they're setting themselves up to lose again in the very near future when companies make shit arbitrarily complex to meet their unhinged fake definitions.
But none of it matters because literally no part of this in any way violates copyright law. Processing data is not and does not in any way resemble copyright infringement.
What a douche to drop a bomb like that to "evaluate" someone:
So is literally every human work in the last 1000 years in every context.
Nothing is "original". It's all derivative. Feeding copyrighted work into an algorithm does not in any way violate any copyright law, and anyone telling you otherwise is a liar and a piece of shit. There is no valid interpretation anywhere close.
Why is letting a producer have control of a project without being micromanaged a bad thing?
Every other publisher gets shit on for being heavy handed and not allowing project leads creative freedom to do their job instead.