you’re still eating more of them by eating animal products…
not necessarily. we mostly feed livestock parts of plants we don’t or can’t eat. so while spinach is human-edible, the spinach fed to chickens is not handled in a way that keeps it safe for human consumption. by feeding it to livestock, we are conserving resources.
other times people i guess think that you could cover a complex topic like this in bite-sized spoon-fed internet comments and memes. i feel pity for those guys.
I have a philosophy degree. I don’t need you to cover the topic. I asked you to support your position.
if you can’t explain your position, I’m not going to go looking for support for you.
reductio ad absurdum
There is no free will. Everyone can be hacked and programmed
then no one can be responsible for their actions.
copyright is immoral
they might claim they’re harmed if the information is distributed for free. I don’t care. that’s not theft.
since the defendant is also a capitalist firm, I can see the similarities, but if someone were to simply be liberating the information, I don’t see that as stealing.
stealing others’ work
Reuters still has their analysis. nothing was stolen.
Whether you support IP or not, the AI company is clearly in the wrong here.
they’re both wrong to restrict access. if legal analysis is necessary to understand the law, then restricting access to that analysis, or it’s free dissemination, is also wrong.
I don’t trust that judge’s ability to determine whether they were copied if it wasn’t verbatim. which is what copyright is. to control an idea, you need a patent.
tragic. no one should need to pay to read the law
right. I just thought they’d made the news today or something.
a dary cow is usually productive for, at most, 5 years. what do you think happens to them after that?
the third party in this country only serves to spoil elections to the benefit of the GOP whenever they pass 1% of the vote.
ross perot was found to have decreased clinton’s margin of victory.
you don’t seem to know what plagiarism is, so I don’t see the point in continuing this conversation.
if I plagiarize The Bible, that has nothing to do with copyright. it’s still plagiarism.
no it’s not. it’s an academic crime.
everyone has an agenda. no one can cover every story. the subject itself is part of the agenda being pushed.
there are anticapitalist publications. you just have to understand the bias inherent in all your media choices.