the DNC heavilly convinced all the establishment candidates other than Biden to drop out

That’s not rigging an election, that’s just politics.

It’s literally the same thing Macron is doing right now to stop Le Pen’s fascists from winning.

Nobody who was paying attention thought he would be a one term president. He said nothing of the sort because that was never his plan. He literally said so at the time:

I don’t have plans on one term

And his campaign emphasized the same thing at the time:

Lots of chatter out there on this so just want to be crystal clear: this is not a conversation our campaign is having and not something VP Biden is thinking about

This is not a conversation we are having among people who actually are running the campaign

And yet people still want to believe a bunch of anonymous “senior advisers” over what Biden actually said. Pure wishcasting.

The only polls that matter are Biden vs Trump, and those haven’t really changed post-debate.

When has any candidate ever invited challengers?

Candidates don’t “step back”, challengers step up. If nobody wants to because the candidate appears certain to win the primary, don’t blame the candidate.

People probably are looking at their performances as president.

The polls have barely budged since the debate. That tells you people aren’t really using debates to decide who to vote for.

Democratic Governors Vow To ‘Stand With’ Biden

Myopia develops in children. If you have any, you’ll know they don’t generally look out of car windows.

The plan is to remind voters that this will be a close election and every vote matters.

However, the debate is irrelevant. On the one hand, you have a liar who hates immigrants and wants to benefit wealthy Christians. On the other hand, you have a lousy debater who respects the rule of law and protects women’s rights.

Nobody faced with this choice is going to ask, “Hmm, just how lousy at debating are we talking?”

The point is that Biden is no worse off than he was before the debate. Few people wanted him to drop out last week. So I don’t see any reason to change course now.

Democrats need to chill. You didn’t see MAGA idiots calling for Trump to drop out after his felony conviction, and you won’t see that after his sentencing. They know those things don’t matter. The debates matter even less.

Biden’s poll numbers went up after the debate.

What’s the issue?

It is federalized. Marijuana is illegal at the federal level.

But one of the advantages of the split between state and federal laws is that states can experiment with decriminalization.

Another example: the people driving in the opposite direction right before 4th of July!

I agree more states should go this, but radical changes in laws aren’t so unusual. For example, marijuana possession can be legal in one state and a felony five minutes away.

The guy responsible for killing Roe v Wade literally took credit for it on TV yesterday.

And you may find yourself behind the wheel of a large automobile. And you may ask yourself, “Well, how did I get here?”

Thanks to the Supreme Court, that’s how

But the training data does contain songs, and they need to pay for those.

Courts have found that scraping data from a public website is legal, because data is not protected by copyright. But copying protected works without permission is generally illegal, it doesn’t matter if you use a scraper.

If the defendants in this case admit using RIAA works, then they will probably try to argue fair use. At that point their product will become relevant, including its commercial nature. This will weigh against them, because their songs directly compete against RIAA songs. In fact, that’s why artists who include samples in their work usually obtain permission first.

This is the basis for the RIAA claims, which sure sounds like piracy:

On information and belief, similar to other generative AI audio models, Suno trains its AI model to produce audio output by generally taking the following steps: a. Suno first copies massive numbers of sound recordings, including by “scraping” (i.e., copying or downloading) them from digital sources. This vast collection of information forms the input, or “corpus,” upon which the Suno AI model is trained.

There is no evidence the AI devs bought any music, for any use. Quite the opposite:

Antonio Rodriguez, a partner at the venture capital firm Matrix Partners, explained that his firm invested in the company with full knowledge that Suno might get sued by copyright owners, which he understood as “the risk we had to underwrite when we invested in the company.” Rodriguez pulled the curtain back further when he added that “honestly, if we had deals with labels when this company got started, I probably wouldn’t have invested in it. I think they needed to make this product without the constraints.” By “constraints,” Rodriguez was, of course, referring to the need to adhere to ordinary copyright rules and seek permission from rightsholders to copy and use their works.

I don’t think this is frivolous. If you publish a song that includes part of my song, that’s good evidence that you copied my song.

This isn’t a prosecution, and nobody is alleging a crime. This is a civil lawsuit.

In a civil lawsuit, the standard of evidence is much different. You do not have to “prove” things beyond a reasonable doubt like in a criminal trial. The jury is instructed to weigh the evidence like a balance, and whichever side has the best evidence wins. Even if it’s only a small difference that only slightly favors one side, they win.

That’s why it’s so important to have evidence that counters whatever the other side claims. You are bound to lose if your opponents are the only ones offering evidence on their side of the balance.