timpetus

I seem to remember someone offering a program that "poisons" image data in a way that is undetectable by the human eye, but makes it not only useless for AI training but actually harmful to any AI model trained using the photo. This is a great way to (a) protect your work without relying on nearly impossible detection and legal enforcement measures and (b) accelerate the inevitable destruction of so-called AI image generation. I believe no matter what, we will get to a state of GIGO with "AI" soon, where the verifiably human-generated pool of training data will continually shrink in comparison to the massive deluge of AI-generated data, some of which will be unidentifiable as such at time of selection.

The answer is always dependent on whether you would have subscribed to all of the individual components of each plan. For me, only increased iCloud storage space is worth it. I've had Apple TV+ when it came with my devices for free, but it's not worth the cost to stay subscribed all the time. No interest in the other services, so Apple One doesn't make sense for me.

Apple is unequivocally in the right, here. They are not required in any way to allow Epic to benefit from their actions in bad faith, and Sweeney is trying the same thing again by making further misleading statements to try to gain sympathy from the public.

Apple has clarified that Epic's submission contained releases in the US and worldwide, and that it won't be allowed until they remove the US part, where they are rightly banned and the courts have stated Apple has no obligation to let them back onto the App Store.

This demonstrates part of why Apple switched to MagSafe on their laptops. If the MM had a built-in battery, it might make some sense to enable power via something more easily disconnected, but I doubt Apple would ever see the need to add one to a desktop machine...