aargh_aargh
Joined 11 years ago
Joined 11 years ago
Sorry for the brutal honesty, just thought it might offer you an explanation of the difference in reaction.
OP's fonts look ugly, but intentionally and purposefully so, in a nails-on-chalkboard manner. In contrast, your example images just look plain ugly to me, can't imagine I would have any use for them.
Sorry again. I do understand the technological fascination with the process, just describing the aestheticity of the result here.
* D4M rolls off the tongue
* Make me buy a book to see the language.The delay is quite a bother but it's surely better than account takeover. What I mind about the process is probably the lack of transparency - what combination of factors (MFA pieces, location, inactive time, ...) launches which process? I get that transparency might help attackers here but they're the ones to have the persistence to figure out the rules anyway. Smells like security through obscurity to me.
https://x.com/OpenRouter/status/2041193329270878707
> Privacy:
>
> Private I/O logging and the 1% data sharing discount are separate settings. You control each independently.
>
> Input & Output Logging stores prompts and completions for your use only and makes them visible in your logs. OpenRouter does not access this data. You can configure it in your observability settings.
>
> As always, more in the docs!
https://openrouter.ai/docs/guides/features/input-output-logg...https://openrouter.ai/docs/guides/features/broadcast/overvie...
I don't make any claim to any special hearing or expertise. I've been listening to practically only lossy music since around '98, ripping from CDs at that time.
Morricone and Vangelis have been especially hard for me to tell apart, could have been a random guess on my part (I listened to those ~20 times).
When I read the title I expected to hear the actual _difference_ between the lossless and lossy waveform - i.e. only the actual artifacts. Could be a fun exercise.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
There's also 5. which probably isn't relevant here but possibly might depending on the definition of person (e.g. a legal person). 5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
And then there's the obvious aspect of AI foundries blatantly ignoring copyright anyway (copyright law grants the the author the rights which he then gives away by way of a license).The normalization of identity verification to use internet services is itself a problem. It's described much better than I could by EFF here:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/01/so-youve-hit-age-gate-...