draco_aeneus

Well, not how USA copyright works, but point well taken. It seems I was too naïve in my understanding of copyright.

I'm sure he just needs some more practice. After a few more Nazis are punched, he'll be an expert, I'm sure.

Exactly. If I use online Photoshop or whatever, and I use the red eye removal tool, I have copyright on that picture. Same if I create a picture from scratch. Just because someone like OpenAI hosts a more complex generator doesn't mean a whole new class of rules applies.

Whomever uses a tool, regardless of the complexity, is both responsible and benificiary of the result.

You can require everyone to maintain their own blocklist, sure. But new users won't benefit from it. Making every single person individually investigate and judge every single bad user/community doesn't seem practical?

People don't say "I call for the destruction of Israel", they say stuff like "A state that does that shouldn't exist" or "let's create a nation in which the Palestinians can live peacefully". These are 'calls' for the end of the current government structure of Israel, or in other words, the destruction of the Israeli state.

The wording of the rule is purposely vague and broad, while still sounds like it is banning something harmful.

People are being specific, but the rule itself is broad. If you say "everyone involved in the genocide should be removed from office", that's specific, clear, broadly agreeable, and yet also 'calling for the destruction of the Israeli state'.

They are used in the majority of European languages, including French. You might see them natively in Canadian-English written by the French speaking part.

Furthermore, because they are used in ~41 different languages, someone using a keyboard layout in that language will get that character, even if the key they press is labeled with an " icon.

Lastly, you should know that Breton (the language/culture that Great Britain is named after) uses them. Not actually directly relevant, but it does show a direct lineage of using guillemets in English. (And also it's a neat fact).

If you want a simple explanation why he couldn't spy:

Imagine that your internet traffic is a bunch of letters. HTTP are postcards. You can read the message and destination both. HTTPS are envelopes. You cannot read the message, but you can see the destination.

When using VPN, you stick every letter/postcard in another envelope, addressed to the VPN company's address. They unpack the letter, set themselves as the return address, and send it on.

Your friend could previously look at the outside of your letters, and see who you're sending to, and how much. Now, they can only see you're sending to the VPN company, which isn't helpful. (In theory, they can see the volume of data, but there isn't much they can learn with just that).

The brackets thing is a real and well-known dogwhistle. If I say that the (((city council))) is putting chemicals in the water, then you should know I'm touting an anti-semetic conspiracy theory.

In this case, using «Guillemets» isn't that, but the thing that they confused it for is real.

Every rule has a back story. You can easily imagine a bunch of kids yelling at each other as they bike down the street. But you cannot make a sign that says "punk kids not allowed".

You can see the left candle stick, but not the right one. This is despite the fact that the reflection should be transposed left (like the clock in the middle). In other words, the reflection is wrong, which isn't immediately obvious, but gives an 'off' vibe.

Non-human, uncaring machines who amass and hoard wealth beyond human comprehension honestly doesn't sound any different than what we have now.

These two graphs cover different time periods. It looks like the monetization of X lines up with that hump of sharply increased knife crime at the end there.