my_hat_stinks

It's ironic because you demand someone be a lawyer to refute an obviously incorrect claim made by a non-lawyer. If you consider me answering the question you asked directly of me "irony" then I suppose I can see how you might consider that comment ironic.

It's definitely worth noting that you've attempted to shift the topic well away from the absurdity of using an open licence to do the opposite of what licences do and instead onto the topic of who is a lawyer and the definition of irony.

Ironic, considering you are undoubtedly not a lawyer and have evidently never even dealt with copyright issues.

CC licences are handy copyleft licences to allow others to use your work with minimal effort. Using them to restrict what others can do is a fundamental misunderstanding of how copyright works. If you want to restrict others' use of your work copyright already handles that, a licence can only be more permissive than default copyright law. You can sign a contract with another party if you want to further restrict their use of your work, but you'll generally also have to give them something in return for the contract to be valid (known as "consideration"). If you wish to do so you can include a copyright notice (eg "Copyright (c) 2024 onlinepersona. All rights reserved.") but that hasn't been a requirement for a long time.

Adding a CC link and falsely claiming it's an anti-AI licence is misinformation and undoubtedly does add confusion.

Likely because it's blatant misinformation and very spammy. Licences permit additional use, they do not restrict use beyond what copyright already does. I imagine there'd be fewer downvotes if they didn't incorrectly claim licencing their content was somehow anti-AI. Still spammy and pointless, but at least not misinformation.

Imagine if someone ended every comment with "I DO NOT GRANT PERMISSION TO LAW ENFORCEMENT TO READ THIS COMMENT. ANY USE OF THIS COMMENT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR ANY REASON IS ILLEGAL. THIS COMMENT CANNOT BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST ANY NON-LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONS IN RELATION TO ANY CRIME."

A bit silly, no?

Seems like a non-issue to me. You'll go to whichever hospital is closest. If you're resident in one of the countries you'll be in EU/EEA and get the usual healthcare for residents of whichever country the hospital is in, if you're non-EU it'll depend on what travel insurance you have.

Nothing is cut off? The only thing missing is one bonus panel.

https://www.litterboxcomics.com/birth-stories/

Blaming the people taking the loans is kind of absurd, for many it's their only option if they want to continue their education. It's not like they're taking out loans they don't need and burning the money.

"Legally-binding contract" is meaningless too, would you make the same argument against people who signed away their lives before slavery was abolished? Just because it's legal now doesn't mean it always will be, or that it must be enforced indefinitely.

You're absolutely right that reducing tuition is the right move. Tuition is free where I am and some of the costs I see elsewhere are crazy. However, the options are not necessarily mutually exclusive; you can reduce tuition and help people that have already been shafted by the existing system.

The name is an analogy, neural networks do not work in the same way as biological neurons. They were designed by computer scientists, not biologists.

RAM is so far removed from biological short term memory both in how it works and how it's used that the comparison doesn't even make sense. The only similarity is that they're short term information/data stores, so it's equally valid to compare them to a drawing in the sand of a beach.

There's no discount there, you're just accepting their marketing bullshit. That sounds to me like the company is double-dipping by shoving ads in your face and making the product objectively worse, then charging even more for a "premium" model where the only difference is they haven't intentionally downgraded it.

with extras like [..] no lockscreen ads

What the fuck? Why is that an extra not just the default? It's great that this product isn't riddled with ads, but that's like saying it's great a burger is not made of human shit; it's crazy that anyone would tolerate a shit-burger in the first place.

Maybe ads are normal in the e-reader space for some reason, but that's just insane to me.

I'm not sure that's a completely accurate analogy either. When you're using a VPN people can still see that you are sending traffic through your tunnel, they just can't tell what it is that you're sending. It's like looking through frosted glass; there's definitely something moving in there but you can't tell what.

I suppose the best way to describe it is you send a locked box to a trusted friend; everyone handling it can see the box but can't tell what's inside. Inside the box is a letter, your friend posts it so it looks like it came from them. Your friend then gets a reply, puts it in a locked box, and send it back to you. Nobody between you and your friend can snoop on your mail but anyone between your friend and the final destination can.

This may have been true historically but I'm not sure it still holds up. I switched to Linux Mint as my regular OS a while back and the only driver issue I've had was that the installer didnt properly install my wifi card's proprietary driver (which was working during live boot from usb), so I had to tether to my phone to download the driver through the driver manager. It even installed Nvidia drivers just fine.

It might still be an issue for more barebones or heavily customisable systems but I'm fairly certain nobody's recommending people switch to Arch for their first Linux experience.