If one takes the opinion interstate commerce means buying, selling and transporting.

It's also how the current system works. Most drug convictions are based on state law. Federal drug prosecutions are 2% of the total. Every state has its version of controlled substances act.

Nothing much would change at all.

I wouldn't find this annoying at all - I would expect to have to do this for hundreds of packages.

Without unpaid volunteers things like Debian do not exist. Don't malign the situation and circumstances of other projects, especially if they are your competitors.

Compete by being better, not by complaining louder.

It is an affirmative defense, you to be able to argue the merits. If you publish their source code, they are allowed to come after you whether they have previously used fair use or not. It's fact specific and determined case by case.

Anthropic won half of their fair use argument in the billion dollar settlement, but lost the other half.

You can say you're just using their code to train your own models, just like they did, and they will correctly point out that how you obtained the code also matters and you will lose just like they did.

how do you have it build a "trading strategy"? it's like asking it to draw you the "best picture".

it will ask you so many questions you end up building the thing yourself.

if you do get something, given that you didn't write it and might not understand how to interpret the data its using - how will you know whether it's trading alpha or trading risk?

I think there's zero point to having a monopoly if you don't distribute the profits.

If you have some argument that dividends are better than buybacks I don't care.

All ASML is doing is raising the share price. The investors that don't want a better deal somewhere else don't have to do a thing - they just have to not sell their shares. ASML is not deciding anything or signaling anything about future returns.

The market is the one sending the signal that there are better deals elsewhere. You can go from $5B to $500B. You can't go from $500B to $50T. There is no amount of R&D that will do that. If you picked a $5-6 billion company in 2008, and it was ASML, congratulations you now have >100x returns.

The inflection point isn't a point where buybacks increase, it's the slow/fast ride up to $500 billion.

The investors chasing 100x returns have already left. Whether the company buys its own shares or sits on its own cash, the net equity value is the same. The only signal it gives to investors is that they have more cash than they want to spend.

I lose control of the execution state. I have to follow the calling conventions which let my flags get clobbered.

To forego all of the above including link time optimization for the benefit of what exactly?

Imagine developing a C program where every object file produced during compilation was dynamically linked. It's obvious why that is a stupid idea - why does it become less stupid when dealing with a separate library?

Edit: I have now read some of the complaint. This is just sec fraud, which is consistent with what the article is claiming. "The opposite of insider trading" ie trading in the direction of the advice you're giving.

Gov says the statements were material, false, with intent. If they can't prove false to the level of being a material statement they will lose.

Edit2: This comes right up to the line, whether it's material to have false/non-statements about your intentions. There's another case that will come up if you research this about whether intentions are material.

Military intervention? Some farmers with sticks?

Do you even know what the Rio Treaty is?