Expected work hours seem to be increasing everywhere over the last twenty years or so. It’s gotten pretty nuts.
Expected work hours seem to be increasing everywhere over the last twenty years or so. It’s gotten pretty nuts.
Remember the time - two days ago - when Trump said he was going to ban all electric cars? I wonder how Elon feels about that.
Celebrities get wide latitude to protect themselves from imitators. Impressionists can do “satire” etc. but this isn’t that. It’s explicitly a reference to her voice in the movie, and as such she’s protected by law from them going around her and hiring someone else to imitate her.
It was explicitly represented as her voice when he tweeted “Her” in relation to the product, referencing a movie which she voiced. It’s not a legal grey area in the US. He sank his own ship here.
He tweeted “Her”, which explicitly tells us it’s a deliberate imitation of Scarlett’s voice in that movie. And he tried to negotiate licencing her famous voice, which she rejected.
So it’s more than just a coincidence, it’s deliberate bad faith behaviour. Legally you can’t misrepresent a product as being from a famous person when it wasn’t, and he very much did that. I guess he was hoping she’d give in and accept the licensing agreement post-facto. But instead it looks he’s in legal deep water now.
All this tells me is that they have a great PR department.
Meanwhile Mercedes has already reached level 3.
One that results in a crime, apparently.
…because based on the facts it is homicide.
A lot of plastics have PFAS in them and I don’t think it’s likely they’ll be rushing to remove them. I wonder how this is going to play out.
Close… That moon’s called LV426
There have been UBI trials before and they found that it didn’t lead to price increases to any great degree.
They definitely did challenge it
And politicians drink alcohol so they’re not exactly lining up to ban it.
deleted by creator
Yes, that’s the difference between “safer” and “actually safe”.
I’m surprised that the supreme court would even hear this request. He’s just a normal citizen now and the brief sounds a lot like someone requesting retrospective absolution for their crimes.
It’s also a fallacy that rust code is memory safe. I audited a couple of large rust projects and found that they both had tens of unsafe constructs. I presume other projects are similar.
You can’t use “unsafe” and then claim that your program’s memory safe. It may be “somewhat safe-ish” but claiming that your code is safe because you carefully reviewed your unsafe sections leaves you on the same shaky ground as c++, where they also claim that they carefully review their code.
deleted by creator
I think about 18 billion of that was me