Last time I went round with someone on this, they insisted that this is just normal business procedure to order product on credit.
To me, while trade credit is definitely a thing, for orders this large I expect there’s some more substantial backing for it.
Ultimately it probably fits in somewhere on a chart of financial shenanigans like this one:
I think it’s more like “we need 6 million chips for this year, and we’ll pay you eventually, maybe”.
But yeah the outcome is the same.
Yeah but symptoms are what kill the patient.
Honestly, AI slop aside the OP gets the message across better. Still downvoted for AI slop though.
It crashes and catches fire?
That doesn’t seem like a good selling point.
g and y are terrible, and v, w, and f are iffy.
Yeah but no one wants to deal with that “as long as they’re within the rules” for you.
Rules and strategy are very separate things when teaching.
Got an explanation for that in English?
It seems to predate the Nazis by a large margin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_gustibus_non_est_disputandum via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suum_cuique )
I don’t think it’s a coherent goal of torpedoing a direct competitor but the way the sloppers seem to do things is a lot of “just trust me bro, use AI for everything”. No actual thought given to anything, especially guidance in how to go about using it.
In that regard, any decently-engineered software is competition to them. And therefore “break everything so LLMs are the only tool” seems to be the strategy they’ve chosen.
The other less-malicious possibility is that they use those tools and want to submit patches, but of course they’re eating their own dog shit so no one wants it. So they try to hide it.
Plenty of better reasons to alter UK foreign policy. Starting with “Brexit was a mistake and caused by Russian interference”.
Yeah but the main reason for all those copyright law differences comes down to “greed, money, and control” as the other replies explain.
No, I don’t think they are.
That’s complete bullshit:
Software I’ve written is owned by me.
Open-source licenses (F/LOSS) mostly cannot be revoked.
Public domain exists.
…never?
ETA can mean “edited to add”
Ah, I meant in the comics themselves. If they want to “advertise” on their page or whatever, more power to them.
This is what I see when I look at warandpeas.com — there’s the name of the comic but nothing that I would call a watermark or an advertisement.
I don’t agree. I just want to know who made the art. Attribution is not the same as advertising.
A Patreon link or a watermark I could see as advertising, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen that directly on a comic image.
Do you have some actual examples?
Do you have some examples of “ads” or watermarks in comics?
IMO artist signatures/names or comic titles are not ads.
A “modern” design, the current trend of shitty suburban layout that seems to be the alternative to the grid layout complained about.
FTFY