kyle-rb

But they're still reticent to ban any Premium account without a reason good enough to give up the $8/month. I have some sympathy for trying to moderate in the era of LLMs that can generate perfectly on-topic replies that even take images into context. But I think they need a more targeted approach against OnlyFans bots replying to popular tweets with a standard formula of some sexual reference and an insane claim. Sometimes they're less sexual and more straight up horrifying [0]:

> i breed mantises for fun and once tried grafting two ooths together just to see what hatched. got a whole clutch of nymphs that all just twitched in circles and died by day two. butterfly chimera energy hits different when it's your own disaster.

The other bot replies to the same OP are the more typical sexualized sort; they tend to reply in swarms.

The initial choices were: "Supreme Intelligence", "Superior Intelligence", "Extreme Intelligence". [0]

Then he removed "Supreme Intelligence" because he said it reminded people of the failing Supreme Court, and it was down to just "Superior" or "Extreme". [1]

Then, presumably after some industry people talked him into a compromise, he decided it was actually between "Superior" or "Super Intelligence", and the latter won. [2]

So the recording itself has no copyright attached, but yes, there's still a question of the copyright on the composition.

I pointed out that there were a couple other E-rated apps that show the exact same image, and many more T-rated ones that only warn of "In-App Purchases" — no "Violence" label. One of the latter is the official Google TV app [0], so I sent some screenshots of that, and asked if maybe they were "crushing the competition" by avoiding their own review process, to see if that would escalate my case (no such luck).