Ross_audio @ Ross_audio @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

271

Joined

2 yr. ago

The point is to prove that copyrighted material has been used as training data. As a reference.

If a human being gets asked to draw the joker, gets a still from the film, then copies it to the best of their ability. They can't sell that image. Technically speaking they've broken the law already by making a copy. Lots of fan art is illegal, it's just not worth going after (unless you're Disney or Nintendo).

As a subscription service that's what AI is doing. Selling the output.

Held to the same standards as a human artist, this is illegal.

If AI is allowed to copy art under copyright, there's no reason a human shouldn't be allowed to do the same thing.

Proving the reference is all important.

If an AI or human only ever saw public domain artwork and was asked to draw the joker, they might come up with a similar character. But it would be their own creation. There are copyright cases that hinge on proving the reference material. (See Blurred Lines by Robin Thick)

The New York Times is proving that AI is referencing an image under copyright because it comes out precisely the same. There are no significant changes at all.

In fact even if you come up with a character with no references. If it's identical to a pre-existing character the first creator gets to hold copyright on it.

This is undefendable.

Even if that AI is a black box we can't see inside. That black box is definitely breaking the law. There's just a different way of proving it when the black box is a brain and when the black box is an AI.

https://youtu.be/DdpGIOv33L4?si=JtN2I3VH4BhgSIyf

Boot = Bootstrap

If you've loaded up a virtual CPU first that's not a boot of mainline Linux on the CPU.

Whoever uploaded that realised they could cut it to exactly the right length.

I didn't even notice the first time I saw it and I don't know it's deliberate on Jon's part but the speech and reaction fit perfectly.

It's an incredible speech and worthy of that detail.

George Carlin was first.

Joan Rivers got there just after.

We've been laughing at jokes about 911 for ages. Being edgy isn't new, even boomers do it

Only when he knows he's not meant to die.

If he was told he was going to die he'd be crying at the moment he realised he was dying. Which as you can see from the first time he said "I don't want to die" would be several minutes.

"Scientific facts" are studies. We're just people on the internet giving opinions.

How it looks to others is not important in my view. If it looks horrible to kill someone that's because it is.

Making it worse to make it appear better is actually pretty abhorrent as far as reasoning goes.

But looking at how America typically kills its citizens means looking at the police. Because deaths caused by the police far outnumber executions.

Those deaths often look pretty horrific.

Exactly.

People were simultaneously told different things by different people on what would happen of the country voted leave. A lot of it obviously false even at the time.

People might have known what they were voting for. But what they were voting for had no basis on what the government would actually do.

Then we had the prime minister who held the referendum resign.

A new prime minister is chosen in a private election amongst members of the conservative party (about 100,000 votes will do it normally but no one actually runs against them). This becomes a theme.

There is legislation passed which essentially puts a clock on the process. If nothing passes we'd just revoke laws and break treaties.

This was meant to scare the EU into giving us what we wanted. The EU was not overly concerned.

The government put some very shoddy legislation together. We got a pretty poor deal from the EU, well we were pretty desperate.

The government couldn't pass that legislation

We had an election for a new government

The government lost seats and lost their majority

The government then joined with a religious extremist party in Northern Ireland to give them a majority.

The shoddy legislation becomes not only shoddy but also more extreme, It still can't pass.

The prime minister is ousted by their own party.

We get a new prime minister.

They still haven't decided on the legislation but they tell everyone what they want to hear.

We have an election

The government gets a big working majority

The shoddy extreme legislation, which we now know from first hand accounts the prime minister didn't understand, still can't pass.

The government literally breaks the law and closes parliament illegally to try and run the clock closer to the point where we take a bonfire to massive ammous of legislation.

The government are then forced back into the house by the courts

Eventually at the last moment a deal is passed. It's really bad for the UK economy, and the UK in general.

The UK leaves the EU. Northern Ireland doesn't. Well it sort of does.

COVID and Another 2 prime ministers later and Brexit deals are still being negotiated.

Essentially he EU has everything it needs. It's protected the interests of bordering nations like the Republic of Ireland and France. The UK has increased friction on trade, labour issues.

The current big issue is that France no longer helps us stop people crossing the channel. That was an EU agreement. So our government, now spends it's time and energy trying to deport people to Rwanda, breaking the entirely separate European Convention on Human Rights Churchill's government basically wrote and passed after the second world war.

It's worth noting that this government has had a vote share of 36.1% pre referendum in 2015 36.9% post referendum in 2017 42.4% post deadlock in 2019 (with the opposition getting 40%)

The conservative party got that lock in 2019 on 55% of the seats with 42.4% of the vote

Since then they've rotated people in and out of government to essentially do the bidding of the one who pays the most into their individual campaign funds against each other.

The government refuse to allow an election even while they're essentially changing constantly.

We haven't really got democracy in this country. We disenfranchise a lot of people through our electoral system by design. We concentrate power to a minority.

It's a mess.

An example of said training given to the untrained.

https://youtu.be/kUfF2MTnqAw?feature=shared

I wouldn't want to die that way.

The pain might not be there but the realisation is.

He's able to state that he doesn't want to die, but needs help putting the mask on.

It's a slow mental death, even if not a physically painful one, it's slow.

The humane way to kill someone is quick and painless. Not slow and painless. This is better than the injection which is slow and painful but still not humane.

It wasn't direct democracy though.

No member of the public ever voted on the legislation.

If the legislation has been put to the public and the referendum bound it to law I think it would have gone differently.

The vote relied people voting for their own version of Brexit vs. the status quo.

I'm not a fan of direct democracy by any means but Brexit isn't an example of it.

It doesn't sound like you're ok with this.

The Whales are singing it.

Essentially it wouldn't be much different to Adele or Taylor Swift singing about their break ups.

We don't know that isn't what the whale is actually doing. Performing a song to a live audience of other whales.

Time to start the rejoin in only another 10 years or so I think. We'll be voting on single market membership again before the decade is out I think.

Net worth includes all asset value. Pensions, investments, and property.

That seems about right to me. A lot will be tied up so liquid assets will be lower.

The 50% upwards middle class being $400,000 will mostly be the value of a house.

Very annoying they just specify "average". I'd expect this data to be based on the median values so it should just say.

Except for people like me I never paid Google with money.

I gave them my date for them to organise and assist me with.

If they can't use my data to assist me, I'll stop giving it to them by turning off permissions and features I don't use.

Google really does need handling over your data to be useful. Especially as the EU gradually forces defaults to be for privacy. Google will need you to opt in more and more and that means they do need to give you good service.

Only half on them are ^^a cute.

Faraday cages are fine. It's just never worth the expense.

It's frequency jammers and active blockers which break the law in a massive way.

The reason being you can control the area a Faraday cage encapsulates. A signal jammer that has any decent effect has to also affect outside the area. Big no

Plenty of buildings are accidentally faraday cages for certain frequencies.

Emergency services have training for buildings with poor signals and it's as simple as putting repeaters down as you progress from outside to inside.

Jammers are much less simple to work around.

I bought n books and I only have 100/2^^n problems left.

The beginnings of a YouTube legend.

Wayfair has not been traded significantly by pension funds because it has not been a significant stock for long enough.

There may be some index linked investments which have pulled in Wayfair stock, but those will be treated as a whole and will be designed to be less risky.

It is a bad thing when stock value can be manipulated upwards by layoffs. It's usually a sign the company is doing worse than they expected, their growth has reached a limit, so logically their long term forecasts should decrease.

But the market recognises their short term balance sheet has just seen an improvement and the short term money moves in. Ready for the ultimate buy out of a company that's reached the peak of growth, so the main owners are ready to sell to a larger company.

Hopefully at an inflated market rate because short term decisions are being made to make the company look better to an algorithm.