If I may make a suggestion - with a parachute.

With no parachute they just go down for a couple minutes. With a parachute they go up and down for hours, in the middle of a hurricane.

The fabled Blahaj cuddle pile.

No but there's a couple subtlies here. If you are calling someone brave, the context is important. It can come off as condescending. Also coming out isn't an all or nothing thing, see here.

Also in this comic they aren't saying they are brave for coming out. They are saying they are brave for being cis. The underlying assumption there being that being cis or trans is a choice that one can be brave for.

Straight shooter is an idiom meaning honest and straightforward or direct. Super is acting as an intensifier. Combined it means they are extremely honest and direct.

NPR reported that a "top concern" is that ChatGPT could use The Times' content to become a "competitor" by "creating text that answers questions based on the original reporting and writing of the paper's staff."

That's something that can currently be done by a human and is generally considered fair use. All a language model really does is drive the cost of doing that from tens or hundreds of dollars down to pennies.

To defend its AI training models, OpenAI would likely have to claim "fair use" of all the web content the company sucked up to train tools like ChatGPT. In the potential New York Times case, that would mean proving that copying the Times' content to craft ChatGPT responses would not compete with the Times.

A fair use defense does not have to include noncompetition. That's just one factor in a fair use defense and the other factors may be enyon their own.

I think it'll come down to how "the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes" and "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;" are interpreted by the courts. Do we judge if a language model by the model itself or by the output itself? Can a model itself be uninfringing and it still be able to potentially produce infringing content?

Trans men tend to be shorter than the average man. Trans women tend to be taller than the average woman. A conference of trans men and trans women will have an extraordinary amount of short men and tall women.

Going off this India traffic police site same as a white curb. High visibility marking the edge of the road.

Trademarks are very narrow. From my quick search Microsoft has 'X' marks in relation to Excel and Xbox.

Meta's trademarks actually has the class, 'Online social networking services,' that will overlap with Twitter's new name.

That's why STP devices should be available to everyone. Everyone should be able to experience peeing in the French countryside at 7:53 in the morning without having to squat braced against their car.

I viewed it as an anti-joke for those suffering from gender dysphoria.

"Look at this grand journey that started in the ocean and has lasted millennia. What wonderful thing awaits us at the end? Gender dysphoria."

I would recommend blocking either this entire community or just me. I have no intention of censoring myself for you.

I don't think you have to prove loss sales for trademark disputes. Just a likelihood of confusion. And from the article:

As part of its marketing for the movie, Lucasfilm authorized Filson to run a cobranded campaign to promote the movie and the clothing company’s products, according to the suit. “Lucasfilm and Filson produced a 60 second commercial prominently featuring video clips from the Indiana Jones 5 film intertwined with video clips of actors using Filson’s own products,” writes Devin McRae, a lawyer for Frost River, in the complaint. “Shockingly, one of the intertwined video clips was one from Indiana Jones 5 featuring Frost River’s Geologist Pack.”

I think they might actually have a case. Use of one of their bags used in a lookalike competitors marketing campaign without clearly showing that it's theirs is probably infringement.

Lack of sales might be an argument to be made if we get to damages but I think this will probably be settled out of court for a nondisclosured amount. It'll probably be cheaper for both parties that way.