FaceDeer @ FaceDeer @fedia.io

Basically [a deer with a human face](https://imgur.com/9Wg5TTx.png). Despit

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

1,813

Joined

1 yr. ago

How is right to learn even relevant here? An LLM by definition cannot learn.

I literally quoted a relevant part of the judge's decision:

But Authors cannot rightly exclude anyone from using their works for training or learning as such.

You should read the ruling in more detail, the judge explains the reasoning behind why he found the way that he did. For example:

Authors argue that using works to train Claude’s underlying LLMs was like using works to train any person to read and write, so Authors should be able to exclude Anthropic from this use (Opp. 16). But Authors cannot rightly exclude anyone from using their works for training or learning as such. Everyone reads texts, too, then writes new texts. They may need to pay for getting their hands on a text in the first instance. But to make anyone pay specifically for the use of a book each time they read it, each time they recall it from memory, each time they later draw upon it when writing new things in new ways would be unthinkable.

This isn't "oligarch interests and demands," this is affirming a right to learn and that copyright doesn't allow its holder to prohibit people from analyzing the things that they read.

This was a preliminary judgment, he didn't actually rule on the piracy part. That part he deferred to an actual full trial.

The part about training being a copyright violation, though, he ruled against.

I'm not writing code for a medical device. I'm tinkering with a mod for a game. I can't imagine how getting something wrong would do any greater harm than wasting some of my time.

Argues for the importance of student essays, and then:

When artificial intelligence is used to diagnose cancer or automate soul-crushing tasks that require vapid toiling, it makes us more human and should be celebrated.

I remember student essays as being soul-crushing vapid toiling, personally.

The author is very fixated on the notion that these essays are vital parts of human education. Is he aware that for much of human history - and even today, in many regions of the world - essay-writing like this wasn't so important? I think one neat element of AI's rise will be the growth of some other methods of teaching that have fallen by the wayside. Socratic dialogue, debate, personal one-on-one tutoring.

I've been teaching myself some new APIs and programming techniques recently, for example, and I'm finding it way easier having an AI to talk me through it than it is grinding my way through documentation directly.

One of those times it's nice to be a prepper, even if only on a relatively small scale. I bought a couple of months' worth of gasoline last week.

That would require an ever-increasing amount of forested land. A carbon pyramid scheme. As soon as you stop increasing the forest's area it goes back to an equilibrium of trees decaying equalling trees growing.

And the rest of them just stay frozen upright forever, I suppose.

You think trees don't die and fall down on their own?

And even if you did do that, where would you store the wood afterwards? You can't let it decay, that'd just put the carbon back into the atmosphere.

I'm responding to someone who said:

Seems like humans are moving towards ending all life on earth. Just another dead rock in an infinite vacuum.

That's the context.

My point is that this is not true, and I'm explaining why it's not true.

You can believe it all you want, the numbers just aren't there. There are only ~3800 nuclear warheads that are ready for launch, across all countries that possess them. That's not enough to put a permanent dent in the human population even if you launched all of them targeted to inflict maximum casualties. Which isn't how they'd be launched, of course - most of them would be aimed at military targets, such as ICBM silos and airstrips that are out in the middle of nowhere.

I expect you'll propose nuclear winter as the actual killing effect. Nuclear winter has been drastically overblown, often for this very reason - to scare people into an anti-proliferation stance. We know a lot more now than we did when the first wild predictions were made.

Again, not to say that nuclear war isn't bad. But if one is to make good decisions one should strive for realistic understanding of the world. It wouldn't literally cause human extinction.

Not to say that nuclear war isn't bad, but we literally don't have enough bombs available to do that.

Ah, so that's what those two swellings on her chest are.

If they're thinking of making "style" something that can be copyrighted, then the effects on AI will be trivial compared to the general creative apocalypse as giant corporations lock everything down and go to war with each other.

What privacy? The Fediverse runs on an open protocol. Everything you say and do is transmitted to the world. If you're posting here your data isn't being bought and sold by big tech, it's being given to them.

This isn't to say that the Fediverse is a bad place or anything, just pointing out one of the tradeoffs in how it works. It's not under any one organization's control but there's consequences from that.

Aha! You were the hacker known as "Four Chan"!

Canada and Mexico are part of North America and are not drifting away. The opposite.

Ironically, Trump might. Though I have yet to see much sign.

Regardless of how you feel about it, you've now discovered something very important; your wife is the sort of person who would lie to you about something very important. I'd recommend contacting a lawyer to make sure that you're ready to protect your interests just in case some kind of escalation happens. Her behaviour hasn't changed now, while she thinks you don't know, but who knows what could happen if she finds out you do?

I'm not saying you should do anything vindictive preemptively, just things like making sure the titles for your property are properly registered or your pension plan is fully in your name, that sort of thing.