TDM, definitely, there's actually evidence of that.
The only machine learning I've personally observed is the click data / PLA algorithms, which I'm pretty sure it's called logistic regression. Which I personally don't consider it to be "AI." It honestly may not even be that complicated.
Remember: the algorithm can't be that complicated. Google crawls 160+ trillion pages, serves different results in every geographical region, and processes 3.5+ billion searches a day. Every search is data, every click is data, and every page probably has 1000+ individual pieces of data, if not more. Running a regression algorithm across that data set would be pretty intense... Not to mention everything else Google does. Also, it can't be that smart since people have cheated Google plenty of times. The first example that comes to mind is when Brain Dean ranked on "how to get high."
I'm working on a new responsive webpage for a Wordpress theme and have been trying to get my page width to scale down.
When I try to make the Chrome browser width as small as it will go, the browser was still too wide, it should be small like the width of a mobile screen.
This is so stupid, lol, the problem was when you have a bunch of tabs open on Chrome the browser won't let you scale the image down to the smallest min. size.
I pasted the localhost URL in a fresh browser session, everything worked, page scaled perfect.
Damn you Google, I've been banging my head on this keyboard for a half hour going over HTML/CSS code I know should (does) work.
Back to work...
Back in 2003, Google Applied Semantics to form the core of their shift to LSI/A - they do use AI, along with a Vector Space Model, NLP, Term Document Matrices and even Stemming to come up with the results (not click data).
The reason I say "Not Click Data" is because it's like "Keyword Stuffing" in the old days - focusing on trends rather than actual context. LSI is all about context and how it relates to clearly define what a given web page is all about.
Over the years, I've learned from experience that offering a Single Use Only license (especially for software) isn't generally a problem in terms of lost sales. Multi-Use or Developer licenses generally cost significantly more and really only appeal to a much smaller audience. Multi-Use "Only" licensing would be an epic fail in my opinion because the higher pricing would discourage the average buyer.
My approach is to offer a Single Use license and then discounts on additional licenses based on volume, which always worked out better for everyone. For example, most often you get customers who don't want to pay the higher costs for a Developer license, because they only need 2 or 3 copies.
Of course, it works even better if you can remotely control the licensing
While I can appreciate your reluctance to purchase a Single Use license, from a developer/business perspective, we don't want to give away the farm either. Most legitimate companies selling digital products, again, especially software, tend to offer 2 or 3 licensing options, i.e.; Student or Basic, Professional and Enterprise. It's always been that way, going back to at least the early 80's, where we'd buy "Seats (flexible licenses)" to use a particular app.
Frequency in the top 10, (does the word exist on the page.)
(tools used: sublime text and excel)
best nylon 2
best nylon strap watch 0
best nylon strap watches 0
best straps 0
best watch 3
best watch strap 2
best watch straps 2
best watches 1
emporio armani 2
nylon strap 7
nylon strap watch 4
nylon strap watches 1
nylon straps 3
nylon watch 4
nylon watch strap 1
nylon watch straps 1
nylon watches 1
nylon webbing 0
seiko 5 1
seiko men's snk809 1
straps nylon strap 0
tag heuer 1
timex men's t2n647 weekender 0
timex unisex t2n651 “weekender 1
watch strap 6
watch straps 5
watch straps watches 0
Note: the original keyword you posted only has 60 global search volume. Considering the obvious commercial intent, it's interesting, but I wouldn't personally target it directly (granted 1-3 good links to that specific page and you can get on page 1 of Google. If you were already in the watch business, okay sure. It's at a competition level where you can get page 1 rankings in about 30 days, which is obviously nice for a keyword with good commercial intent. Similar results are far more competitive. From a pure SEO perspective, the keyword "maratac nato" would be much better. The competition level is "do good onpage seo and get 1 good link" level for page 1. The volume is better and the CI is still there. The number 1 result only has one good link and two pretty bad links. So 3 good links should get you to number 1 assuming the onpage SEO is good.)