It’s a general rule.

No. If it’s a copy, then it falls under copyright regardless of how the copy is made. The question wasn’t about copying, though.

Be aware that copyright only covers the creative elements; ie things that other people would do differently. It also doesn’t cover ideas, methods, and the like. It also doesn’t cover very short or obvious creations. So, copyright on code comes from UI design, comments, names, even the ordering of lines, functions, splitting the code into files, using shorthand or not, and so on. Snippets and even short functions are typically not copyrightable. If you have some short program that anyone would write that way, then that’s not copyrightable, beyond comments and maybe names.

If I submit code to ReactOS that was trained on leaked Microsoft Windows code, what are the legal implications?

None. There is a good chance that leaked MS code found its way into training data, anyway.

It’s never effective. At best, you could make the argument that a certain person lacks the wherewithal to have manipulated a signature, or gotten someone else to do it. One has to hope that the marketing BS does not convince courts to assign undue weight to forged evidence.

Sort of. A camera with internet connectivity could automatically “notarize” photos. The signing authority would vouch that the photo (or other file) hasn’t been altered since the moment of signing. It wouldn’t be evidence that the photo was not manipulated before that moment.

That could make, EG, photos of a traffic accident good evidence in court. If there wasn’t time to for manipulation, then the photos must be real. It wouldn’t work for photos that could have been taken at any time.

You could upload a hash to the blockchain of a cryptocurrency for the same purpose. The integrity of the cryptocurrency would then vouch that the photo was unaltered since the upload. But that’s not cost-effective. You could even upload the hash to Reddit, since it’s not believable that they would manipulate timestamps to help some random guy somewhere in the world commit fraud.

https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/5057-understanding-how-marginal-taxes-work-its-all-part

Your local tax system probably works the same.

Wealth has a hereditary component.

This may be a language issue. “Bill” in this context means the total amount you have to pay. EG A restaurant bill is what you get from a waiter when you want to pay.

So, for people who don’t get the joke, a quick overview.

Atmospheric CO2 has increased from ~280 parts per million to ~430 ppm now. This causes problems besides global warming; notably ocean acidification. Scientists try to infer CO2 levels in the past from various indirect evidence. It seems that levels have not been this high in many millions of years, much longer than the existence of our or most other species.

That said, direct effects from these elevated CO2 levels are extremely implausible. We exhale CO2, meaning that indoor concentrations are typically much higher than these elevated atmospheric levels. On top of that, you have a lot of combustion, especially in cities. Cities have elevated CO2 concentrations compared to the surrounding area (think about smog). The northern hemisphere has higher concentrations than the southern one. The CO2 concentrations most of us live with have more to do with our immediate surroundings than global levels. Fun fact: Roadside grass can have a radiocarbon date of thousands of years.

The most iconic CO2 measurements (Keeling Curve) are taken on Hawaii, on a mountain in the middle of nowhere. I have heard that Elon and the felon are shutting that down now.

High CO2 levels can become a problem in badly ventilated places. CO2 is slightly heavier than air, so it can build up in wine cellars or cesspits. Fermentation creates the CO2. Typically, that kills more than 1 person. Person #1 goes down, passes out. Person #2 goes down to check on them.

FWIW globally, there is the issue of “welfare traps”. Benefits for low income people are usually tied to income (or savings). Once income reaches a threshold, these benefits must be replaced with income. So a higher income may result in a net loss.

I feel that “outgroup dumb” is shitposting but it’s from a real poll.

https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/5057-understanding-how-marginal-taxes-work-its-all-part

Can’t tell if joke or … gestures vaguely at post

Don’t really see the problem. If you pick up the content while web crawling, you will end up with a lot of duplicates, but that’s normal. If you wanted to scrape the Fediverse in particular, you’d know the structure of the data.

I wonder why Bluesky bothers. The reaction was predictable.

Were those scales made by Big Tick? Bullshit, man.

1. This is exactly the intended purpose of fair use. Look up the copyright clause.

2. Small creators are the biggest beneficiaries of this. They would have to pay the extortionate licensing fees.

You can read the IA’s take on these issues here: https://blog.archive.org/2023/11/02/internet-archive-submits-comments-on-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence/

Their take is quite different from the sentiment that seems to prevail in this community.

GDPR is not copyright, despite all similarities. I assume that you accept that copyright does not work like that, since you are changing the subject.

Note that the GDPR does not claim to be applicable in third countries; ie outside the territory where EU law is enforced. It only seeks to regulate dealings of outside parties with people in the EU. Even that can’t be practically enforced, usually. Once data leaves the EU, there isn’t much EU governments can do about it, which is why the GDPR has serious rules about data transfers to third countries. (That’s a problem for the fediverse.)

They follow French law in France and US law in the US. How else could it work?

They can’t choose to apply US labor law in France. Do you think they can be made to follow French labor law in Silicon Valley?