The problem is that there's no incentive for employees to stay beyond a few years. Why spend months or years training someone if they leave after the second year?
But then you have to question why employees aren't loyal any longer, and that's because pensions and benefits have eroded, and your pay doesn't keep up as you stay longer at a company. Why stay at a company for 20, 30, or 40 years when you can come out way ahead financially by hopping jobs every 2-4 years?
OKAY, time for some clarification as a Seattle local:
This was NOT an isolated incident. The Cuff Complex, which was one of the bars that got raided, had been raided so many times in the past the owner had to put up a sign warning customers not to wear jockstraps because of the heavy enforcement (which ironically caused him to lose even more business because everyone was pissed at the owner for "policing bodies")
Gay bars were being targeted disproportionately to straight bars. Remember, there are a LOT more straight bars than gay bars. Raiding 4 gay bars covers a sizable chunk of all the gay bars in Seattle, but raiding 14 straight barsis a relative drop in the bucket.
A gay cabaret club owner crunched the numbers and found his establishment was raided 1,550% more than the average liquor licensee. The owner of the Cuff also owns another gay bar and a regular straight bar. His two gay bars are frequently raided, while the straight bar has NEVER been raided.
The board that enforces liquor laws is the LCB. Two funny facts: First, the rule against lewd conduct was created by... The LCB, not the state legislature. Second, the LCB stands for the Liquor and Cannabis board, which means that they are already ignoring a law when it suits their purpose (the federal prohibition against cannabis).
The broader metaverse--mainly VRChat--had a brief boom during the pandemic, and several conventions (okay yeah it's furries) held events in there instead since they were unable to hold in-person events. It's largely faded away though as pandemic restrictions relaxed
Yeah, because having a chatbot that agrees to sell a car for $1 or writes a poem for customers trashing the company it represents is so much better than having something that can think for itself...
My first ever car was a 95 civic 2-door. Beat it to hell, fucked up a wheel so that there was a 1/4" of clearance between tire and wheel well, the exhaust fell off, the computer was starting to act up, and I still kick myself for letting my friend talk me into selling it for a 2003 ford escape. That got sold for a song after I fucked up the engine head trying to fix the second popped spark plug it had...
Ah, yes, you don't have an actual rebuttal so everything is just "propaganda" and "cyberpunk dystopia" as if snake oil salesmen hawking freaking AI-powered vibrators and vagueposting about the benefits of AI while downplaying or ignoring its very real, very measurable harms, while an entire cottage industry of individuals making a living on their creative endeavors being forced into wage slave office jobs isn't even more of a dystopia.
Try actually talking to an artist sometime bud, I don't know of a single one that is actually okay with AI, and if you weren't either blind or an "ideas guy" salivating at the thought of having a personal slave to make (shitty, barely functional, vapid) shit without paying someone with the actual necessary skills, you'd agree too.
ideally? It means that AI companies have to throw away their entire training model, pay for a license that they may not be able to afford, and go out of business as a result, at which point everyone snaps out of the cult of AI and realizes it's as overhyped as block chain and pretends it never happened. Pardon me while I find a flea to play the world's tiniest violin. More realistically, open models will be restricted to FOSS works and the public domain, while commercial models pay for licenses from copyright holders.
Like, what, you think I haven't thought through this exact issue before and reached the exact conclusion your leading questions are so transparently pushing that open models will be restricted to public works only while commercial models can obtain a license? Yeah, duh. And you know what? I. Don't. Care. Commercial models can be (somewhat) more easily regulated, and even in the absolute worst case, at least creators will have a mechanism to opt out of the artist crushing machine.
Yeah, no, stop with the goddamn tone policing. I have zero interest in vagueposting and high-horse riding.
As for what I want, I want generative AI banned entirely, or at minimum restricted to training on works that are either in the public domain, or that the person creating the training model received explicit, opt-in consent to use. This is the supposed gold standard everyone demands when it comes to the widescale collection and processing of personal data that they generate just through their normal, everyday activities, why should it be different for the widescale collection and processing of the stuff we actually put our effort into creating?
Huh? How does that follow at all? Judging that the specific use of training LLMs--which absolutely flunks the "amount and substantiality of the portion taken" (since it's taking the whole damn work) and "the effect on the market" (fucking DUH) tests--isn't fair use in no way impacts parody or R34. It's the same kind of logic the GOP uses when they say "if the IRS cracks down on billionaires evading taxes then Blue Collar Joe is going to get audited!"
It's like nobody here actually knows someone who is actually creative or has bothered making anything creative themselves
I don't even have a financial interest in it because there's no way my job could be automated, and I don't have any chance of making any kind of money off my trash. I still wouldn't let LLMs train with my work, and I have a feeling that the vast majority of people would do the same
So because corps abuse copyright, that means I should be fine with AI companies taking whatever I write--all the journal entries, short stories, blog posts, tweets, comments, etc.--and putting it through their model without being asked, and with no ability to opt out? My artist friends should be fine with their art galleries being used to train the AI models that are actively being used to deprive them of their livelihood without any ability to say "I don't want the fruits of my labor to be used in this way?"
Hell, that article is also all about Google Books, which is an entirely different beast from generative AI. One of the key points from the circuit judge was that Google Books' use of copyrighted material "...[maintains] respectful consideration for the rights of authors and other creative individuals, and without adversely impacting the rights of copyright holders." The appeals court, in upholding the ruling that Google Books' use of copyrighted content is fair use, ruled "the revelations do not provide a significant market substitute for the protected aspects of the originals."
If you think that gen AI doesn't provide a significant market substitute for the artwork created by the artists and authors used to train these models, or that it doesn't adversely impact their rights, then you're utterly delusional.
I think there's room for "Churchill was instrumental in the fight against fascism" and "Churchill was himself racist and enacted racist policies that lead to genocide" to coexist.
Yeah, before Tucker got his Fox segment, he used to do a show on CNN with Paul Begala called Crossfire, whose entire schtick was having a conservative and a liberal talking head co-hosting the show and basically arguing with each other for an hour. Jon came on the show in 2004 and ripped the entire concept apart so thoroughly that it got the entire show cancelled. It's truly a glorious moment: https://youtu.be/aFQFB5YpDZE&t=0
An actual technical answer: Apparently, it's because while the PS5 and Xbox Series X are technically regular x86-64 architecture, they have a design that allows the GPU and CPU to share a single pool of memory with no loss in performance. This makes it easy to allocate a shit load of RAM for the GPU to store textures very quickly, but it also means that as the games industry shifts from developing for the PS4/Xbox One X first (both of which have separate pools of memory for CPU & GPU) to the PS5/XSX first, VRAM requirements are spiking up because it's a lot easier to port to PC if you just keep the assumption that the GPU can handle storing 10-15 GB of texture data at once instead of needing to refactor your code to reduce VRAM usage.
Eccitaze @ Eccitaze @yiffit.net Posts 4Comments 338Joined 2 yr. ago
The problem is that there's no incentive for employees to stay beyond a few years. Why spend months or years training someone if they leave after the second year?
But then you have to question why employees aren't loyal any longer, and that's because pensions and benefits have eroded, and your pay doesn't keep up as you stay longer at a company. Why stay at a company for 20, 30, or 40 years when you can come out way ahead financially by hopping jobs every 2-4 years?