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.
I've seen this delay in action when logging in into an old dormant Google account. After I provided correct password (and some other details I remember vaguely - probably no phone number set and some problem with using the TOTP I set up long ago), it sent an email to the linked primary email and waited for a day to give it a chance to abort before logging me in.
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.
> 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!
The practical concern of Linux developers regarding responsibility is not being able to ban the author, it's that the author should take ongoing care for his contribution.
Huh, I guessed all correct. Random guess would have a 1/(2^5) = 1/32 chance of being correct.
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.
Not an objection, you're fully within your rights to invent a license, just remember that a license with such clause would not be an open source license as per the Open Source Definition [1].
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).
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.
reply