Sure, but the argument isn’t “should we ban work that is based on the study of past cultural creation” it’s “we should prevent computational/corporate exploitation of past cultural creation in order to protect the interests of humans.”
I’m not sure what EXACTLY you’d be looking for from a search feature as I’m mostly a light user myself, but there’s a search option which will search the contents of all your notes. I can’t tell you how robust it is, but it does have exclusion (desiredTerm -excludeTerm) search at least, and there’s standard Find/Replace functionality once you’re in the specific note.
So… it pays in exposure?
I think you’ll find loads of young people without time for art, too.
The minors were charged with 20 counts of creating child sex abuse images and 20 counts of offenses against their victims’ moral integrity.
The article doesn’t make the claim that the AI is what makes it illegal, simply that AI was used. It’s literally the second sentence. Indeed, it goes on to highlight that there are legal novelties prosecuting the use of AI.
That 2600 pages of Trans hate collection is 60MB.
The article referenced is about their Desktop application
Not OP, but it’s listed as “cornflour” here: https://www.npr.org/2024/06/19/nx-s1-5012595/climate-activists-arrested-stonehenge
The article links back to a page/post from the group the activists were with, and appears to be the source of the substance identification.
That’s not an excellent example. If they refuse to collaborate with them, and also don’t make any claims about the quality of code, then the claim that their objectivity in reviewing code is tainted doesn’t hold.
They died doing what they loved. Placing their very life into the hands of techbro con artists.