Why investigate anything?

To make sure, and remove plausible deniability.

Depends largely on the training data. If it’s completely trained on music he owns the copyright to, more power to him.

1. We are told not to judge, but to leave it to Him to judge, but we can point out the sin in our brothers and sisters so they may hate it and turn away from it, and love is not letting others fall into sin, it is pointing out their sin but only so they themselves may hate it and turn away from it, not to mock shame them. And if a father loves his child unconditionally, and the child wants to leave the house and run off into the forest to be devoured by the wolves, can the father stop them? Bind them as a slave? No.

But that would make the bolded part unnecessary, yet you seem to say that it is good to do it.

Judging doesn’t just mean being negative about something. It means telling someone that what they do is bad, or wrong.

Which is what you describe as not judging.

Absolutely. One of the reasons why replication studies are so valuable, yet they rarely get any news coverage.

Speaking of rights:

Most AI is trained on copyrighted material without permission.

So if not having the rights to a photo is holding them back, then that should also hold them back from one of those AIs, they don’t have the rights either.

Do you mean the people on stage, or the trophy?

Because I am torn on which looks more evil.

Work in theater, can confirm.

Israel won by being allowed to compete.

“protect”.

We know how these people think.

Of course it does. But it always happens about ten years after the breakthrough, and we barely notice, because batteries just get a bit smaller, so the capacity stays the same.

No, that’s the other one.

Maybe it comes from the distinction between meat and fish that stems from fasting in Catholicism.

Yeah, make it twins!

That supposed golden age was a time of massive deregulation, which is still wreaking havoc on the country.

The organisation that started it is called Eurovision.

Tithing is expected. There is peer pressure involved, so it can hardly be called voluntary.

So, Trumped up.

Maybe? I don’t know the specific rules, so I just went the quotes text.

But yeah, that would be crazy.

Reads to me as saying that it must contain meat, not that it must only contain meat.

So any sausage with meat as one of its ingredients would count, but anything that doesn’t contain any meat would not.

Which, to me, is ridiculous, because most vegetarian options have a variation on the word “replacement” on the packaging.

This is just the meat industry throwing it’s weight around.