Comments by "De Armas" (@dearmas9068) on "LegalEagle" channel.

  1. This would have been a nice opportunity to use editing rather than an explanation. He could have set up a murder-counter graphic that pops up and a little 'ding' sound whenever there was murder. Then just make acknowledging facial expressions at each one, and occasionally expound on specific details. If I were his editor, I would have suggested that.
    50
  2.  @DukDolan  it's just hilariously embarrassing watching random trolls argue with professionals. Ever hear a 10 year old say "they should hire me as a game designer because I have a lot of good ideas"?
    9
  3.  @-Thunder  are you a lawyer or legal professional?
    5
  4.  @wmbtech  wow, what a thoughtless, childish, and dumb comment..
    3
  5.  @wmbtech  was that a "I know you are, but what am i?" Response? You should really take a look in the mirror, son...
    3
  6. This is a dumb comment...
    2
  7. eyeroll
    2
  8.  @Noobish_Camper55  so you're saying that LE isnt a lawyer but just an actor?
    2
  9. The issues with plagiarism in AI use is a very serious problem and needs to be addressed by legal means ASAP.
    2
  10. I like the analogy of a collage. An even better one is that AI "art" is the algorithmic equivalent of tracing.
    2
  11. eyeroll
    2
  12. That's why we have professionals who do this job professionally.
    1
  13. He literally said the defense had to prove they were engaging in that behavior before he would be permitted to use that term to describe them. He was very clear.
    1
  14.  @robv116  they arent victims.
    1
  15. That's just a little less than what I pay in the US - the conversion rate is still about $1.50 for every £1.00, right?
    1
  16. So.... they're both kinda childish, dramatic, and full of shit. Rediculious humans. I wish society didnt worship these movie stars like this. It's so stupid.
    1
  17.  @Noobish_Camper55  if you say so.
    1
  18.  @pyromaniak2736  It reminds me of listening to children argue about politics.
    1
  19.  @williamjenkins4913  so you feel the unrelated professional missed a bunch of basic facts that you didnt? You feel you know more? You'll have to forgive me if I insult BOTH your intelligence and ego at this point...
    1
  20.  @azn2xcbbjai  lol the actual lawyer knows less than the bum-ass random internet guy, or hes just lying? Great. Cool. You've convinced me. Well done.
    1
  21.  @williamjenkins4913  that's a funny way of explaining that all my insults went over your head. You're not though. You're inserting things you feel are important regardless of the truth they hold or the value they actually possess. Once again. It's like watching children argue about politics.
    1
  22. eyeroll
    1
  23. Who has responsibility for firearms on set? Any answer other than EVERYONE is unacceptable.
    1
  24.  @GH-oi2jf  doesnt matter. Firearm safety is paramount. Period. It's like being on a construction site with heavy equipment. EVERYONE gets a basic overview of how to not get yourself or someone else killed. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that the real professional shoots dont just have an armorer on site, but require basic firearm safety training. FFS! If you can require sexual harassment and diversity and inclusion training, then you can require the equally (or even more) important dont-shoot-your-coworker training.
    1
  25.  @blackvial  its important to have someone in charge, sure. But dangerous tools/equipment are EVERYONE'S responsibility. That's not an argument or a matter of opinion. That's just how responsible professional adults do things. Period.
    1
  26. eyeroll
    1
  27.  @SkidMarkSteve69  my 95 year old grandmother does it too. You see, that's the reaction you get when people notice that you're being obnoxious and dumb. Hope that cleared it up for ya...
    1
  28. You're not a lawyer or legal professional, are you?
    1
  29. Would you be willing to do a vid on the Deshawn Watson case?
    1
  30. It was a fair request. Different devices and different manufacturers do that differently. Especially when AI is used to calculate an enhancement of the image/footage.
    1
  31.  @johnathanera5863  yes it absolutely is. If you're not familiar, then please consider taking a little time to educate yourself on the matter.
    1
  32.  @johnathanera5863  that's absolutely not true. It is not even remotely impossible regulate or enforce. Not at all! In fact it's been quite easy. This new technology will require some time, but the ultimate results need to be heavy regulations and adjusted definitions of what these companies making and using AI can do. And yes. That absolutely is happening, and you're a damn fool for suggesting otherwise.
    1
  33.  @johnathanera5863  I'm sorry but it's very clear that YOU are the ignorant one here. I understand that you want to defend the tech, but it absolutely is crossing the line. You're wrong. You don't know what you're talking about, and you need to let it go.
    1
  34.  @johnathanera5863  also, dont upvote your own comments...
    1
  35.  @johnathanera5863  no. Sorry. You have no clue what you're talking about. You're just an angry little man-child with an oversized ego. It's been pretty amazing the lengths some of you have gone to discredit artists on this very clear, cut and dry issue. And every single one of your justifications have been born of denial, dishonesty, and spite. Get over yourself, boy
    1
  36. This doesnt apply in every situation. This example you offered is completely seperate at several levels.
    1
  37. It's not. You're emotions arent as high on this one is all.
    1
  38. eyeroll
    1
  39. This is a weird thing to say. You're weird.
    1
  40. This isnt a question of legality. It's a question of audacity...
    1
  41. Lol. No.
    1
  42. eyeroll
    1
  43. eyeroll
    1
  44.  @angrydragonslayer  people responding with words that are getting their comments removed
    1
  45. This! Tell us a couple of stories, man!
    1
  46. eyeroll
    1