I feel like this paints Hamas in a much more forgiving light that it deserves. Hamas “won” the election after a violent campaign of intimidation and even then only by a plurality. While Fatah has many flaws, it’s not a religio-fascist organization prone to arbitrary violent cruelty. Yes, Fatah criticizing Hamas is nothing new, but more because they’re fundamentally opposed groups than Western preferences.
Cool. You clearly don’t know what you’re talking about then!
Why? What in the world does your arbitrary cherry picked items have to do with the topic at hand? Are you trying to say that that is the entirety of talmudic discourse and that concepts of charity, stewardship, kindness, and growth are nowhere explored in the Talmud? I’m not saying there aren’t many troubling aspects to Jewish liturgical Tesoro tradition. What I am saying is that they’re about in par with any religion and shit like the OP posted is pretty fucking ignorant and dumb.
Unfortunately, I don’t think you’ll find that as much anymore. One of understated but equally awful side effects of Hamas’ very successful pogrom is, in targeting who it did among the Israeli population, it pushed a lot of Israeli society currently in Israel hard right even beyond standard rally around the flag effects. The Israeli left and peace activist movement effectively died last year.
Yea, Judaism has no such thing as a deep and extensive set of rabbinical discourses that are as fundamental as the Torah. Really solid and thoughtful observation.
This slightly misses the mark. The majority of crimes, including violent ones, are not committed by people performing a risk calculus. They’re done with minimal thought and more often than not in the heat of the moment. Effectively, they are not crimes that you can deter because for a crime to be deterred, the potential criminal has to assess whether it makes sense to commit the crime. This works in cases of like financial fraud and white collar crime. Someone shooting another person during an altercation, not so much.
Yes, we should also be addressing the failings of our penal system(s). Unfortunately, many around the world, and clearly yourself included, are more interested in retributive “justice” than habilitative functions.
Keep in mind that this isn’t creating 3d Billy volumes at all. While immensely impressive, the thing being created by this architecture is a series of 2d frames.
You have different fees related to bringing the patent to issuance that depend on the quality of the application (many patents just never issue) and that can rack up considerably. Then you have maintenance fees every few years after issuance that increase exponentially. In the US.
Filing and prosecuting a patent application is already very expensive. Moreover, different entities are charged different rates, ranging from solo inventory (75% discount), to small entity (50%), and large/standard entity (0%, of course). Might be a little off on those discounts, been a minute since I’ve had to look directly at it.
If your fundamental goals are dead people and just publicity, sure, then I guess this was a roaring success. Typically success for matters is defined by advancing, say, the freedom and dignity of the Palestinians suffering under oppression, though. And by that very reasonable metric, no, this whole thing has been a catastrophic failure on the part of Hamas, the group that (violently) usurped governance of Gaza years ago. There is unlikely, and this was predictable from the get-go, to be any substantive advancement of the benefit of the Palestinian people, or Gazans in particular. A random lemmy poster put it on a perfectly succinct and correct manner when reports of 10/7 first came out–Hamas shot every single Palestinian in both Gaza and the West Bank square in the dick this time.
I really hate this reduction of gpt models. Is the model probabilistic? Absolutely. But it isn’t simply learning a comprehensible probability of words–it is generating a massively complex conditional probability sequence for words. Largely, humans might be said to do the same thing. We make a best guess at the sequence of words we decide to use based on conditional probabilities along a myriad number of conditions (including semantics of the thing we want to say).
The ultimate issue is that the models don’t encode the training data in any way that we historically have considered infringement of copyright. This is true for both transformer architectures (gpt) and diffusion ones (most image generators). From a lay perspective, it’s probably good and relatively accurate for our purposes to imagine the models themselves as enormous nets that learn vague, muddled, impressions of multiple portions of multiple pieces of the training data at arbitrary locations within the net. Now, this may still have IP implications for the outputs and here music copyright is pretty instructive, albeit very case-by-case. If a piece is too “inspired” by a particular previous work, even if it is not explicit copying it may still be regarded as infringement of copyright. But, like I said, this is very case specific and precedent cuts both ways on it.
I really don’t see how this could possibly be “the most success they’ve ever had against Israel.” Public support is still very much mixed, Israeli support has been all but fucking obliterated as the country shifts hard right in response, Gaza has been predictably utterly devastated, and the settler fuckwits are being given a blind eye by both the Israeli government and people now to thoroughly escalate their intrusions and crimes. The only “success” to come out of this entire situation is that Hamas I guess, as well as Likudnik ahitheads and worse, are reapectively experiencing massive rally round the flag gains.
This is actually an effective measure when you sit down to actually think about this from a policy perspective. Right now, the biggest issue with AI generated content for the corporate side is that there is no IP right in the generated content. Private enterprise generally doesn’t like distributing content that it doesn’t have ability to exercise complete control over. However, distributing generated content without marking it as generated reduces that risk outlay potentially enough to make the value calculus swing in favor of its use. People will just assume there are rights in the material. Now, if you force this sort of marking, that heavily alters the calculus.
Now people will say wah wah wah no way to really enforce. People will lie. Etc. But that’s true for MOST of our IP laws. Nevertheless, they prove effective at accomplishing many of their intents. The majority of private businesses are not going to intentionally violate regulatory laws of they can help it and, when they do, it’s more often than not because they think they’ve found a loophole but were wrong. And yes, that’s even accounting for and understanding that there are many examples of illegal corporate activity.
Food production and transport is famously a zero emission industry.
We live in an age where you can literally talk face to face with virtually anyone, nearly anywhere in the world on a tiny rectangle in your pocket. Yes, we can all afford to travel a little less over long distances.
This is very incorrect except for the very high level. Patents cover systems and methods and devices that are more than mere physical phenomena. Patent owners are granted an exclusive monopoly over the implementation of what the patent issued on (i.e., its eventual claims) that runs up to 20 years from the time of filing. They are an intellectual property right premised in property theory.
Trademarks cover designators of origin. Fundamentally, they are to reduce consumer confusion and are ultimately nothing more than a presumption once granted in favor of the owner in unfair competition disputes. They are also an intellectual property but are premised in totally different theories of law and can apply to literally anything that can be strongly associated with a company, more or less.
Copyright is an intellectual property, yes, but is limited to creative expression fixed in a tangible medium. This is a very short sentence but has some pretty serious depth to it. Copyright is ultimately a very specific type of right to, and this may shock you, copying a thing (fixed in a tangible medium…you do not have copyright on ideas).
That all said, pharma patents and, really, industry as a whole is super fucked and needs serious reimagining in the current era. But some form of IP absolutely is necessary to incentivize and enable drug creation of it is to persist in our free market capitalist economic structure.
No, but parenting can be pretty complex and there is a large degree of variability child to child. The idea that you either are a psychotic helicopter parent (because there is really no other interpretation to demanding a parent be around their toddler 24/7) or simply should not have children is a gross oversimplification and also, more importantly, fuckinh prima facie dumb as shit.