Does it apply if you don't say that you are posting under the license? It may be implied, the intent is reasonably clear, but an argument of ambiguity can be made. You're merely linking to a license.
Does it apply if the link label mismatches the license? CC by-nc-sa does more than deny commercial AI training. It requires attribution, requires general non-commercial use, and requires share-alike.
Personally, I prefer when it's at least differently formatted to indicate it as a footer and not comment content. I've seen them smaller and IIRC italic on other commenters, which seems more appropriate and less distracting and noisy [for human consumption]. When the comment is no longer than the license footer… well…
I don't think it seems like too few samples for it to work.
What they train for is rather specific. To identify anger and hostility characteristics, and adjust pitch and inflection.
Dunno if you meant it like that when you said "training people's voices", but they're not replicating voices or interpreting meaning.
learned to recognize and modify the vocal characteristics associated with anger and hostility. When a customer speaks to a call center operator, the model processes the incoming audio and adjusts the pitch and inflection of the customer's voice to make it sound calmer and less threatening.
I think it's to be expected and excusable. When reading the summary with it in mind, that it's a bot summary, not a human summary, it's acceptable and still useful. Text is not necessarily coherent. And when it isn't, it can indicate other content.
I read a different autosummary earlier today with a similar issue. It referred to something or someone not previously mentioned in the summary. With auto-summarization in mind, it was obvious that there is more information on that in the full article. In a way, that was also useful in and of itself (instead of simple emission).
Dunno why asking whether to ban. Are others even better? None logically understand the text. If most are coherent, this may be an outlier. If machine summarization is not good enough for someone they don't have to read it.
PC. Most often mouse or keyboard and mouse. Sometimes gamepad, then maybe streaming to my TV and sofa. I have a SteamDeck, but it's not getting much use. Like my Vive.
How do you think the US tried to make China invade?
I think it's a bafflingly absurd claim. And I'm surprised some people wouldn't doubt it.
How does this fit into China invading and harassing other ships in international waters near Taiwan? Or China punishing Taiwans independent election results by doing military maneuvers around Taiwan, clearly showing force and threatening. And the constant reiterations of considering Taiwan as part of China. Integration of Taiwan is a clear and repeatedly voiced goal. Their willingness to use force was shown repeatedly; in Tibet, Hong Kong, and against minorities in their own established lands.
I don't see how with such a discrepancy believing the Chinese claims makes any sense. It's smoke and trying to influence and irritate the western nations and their alliances. Similar playbook to Russia.
I think it's not closed off enough, given that I regularly see accounts from other instances post comments that go against the goals and spirit set by Beehaw.
At the same time, I think we don't have enough of a new content stream. I don't think opening up is a good solution though. That would mean losing what sets Beehaw apart.
approachable and friendly for people curious about free and open source operating systems and Linux distributions
which is definitely not the content there. Looks like the original website went defunct in 2022 between January and May. Their website repo is archived.
I don't think "Don't feed the trolls" [alone] is a solution on a public internet forum with changing people. New trolls will come anyway. Some people will always sometimes engage. And if the trolls continue, even without responses, it sets a mood in discussions and threads that influences people whether they engage or not.
A title, a teaser text, two paragraphs, and only in the one after inside a quote can I read that it's limited blocking within Russia, not a general removal or blockage.
Kissaki @ Kissaki @beehaw.org Posts 33Comments 481Joined 1 yr. ago
A meteorite… because it crashed? 😄