bedrooms @ bedrooms @kbin.social

Posts

10

Comments

560

Joined

2 yr. ago

But, this is the opposite of what it should be. Those who needed less money and were able to pay for the last 10 years straight are likely in the wealthier class.

Why should we care when changing jobs is the better way to promote ourselves anyway?

Although I understand your point, it's a stupid fucking piece of shit excuse.

Although I can agree with you on the legal challenge, The Economist are journalists. Journalists are supposed to investigate.

Instead, they take Israeli stance at the face value and claim it's not genocide.

Well, regarding text online, most is there fir the visitors to read fir free. So, if we end up treating these AI training like human reading text one could argue they don't have to pay.

Reddit doesn't pay their users, anyway.

But personally, philosophically, I don’t see how Microsoft taking NYT articles and turning them into a paid product is any different than Microsoft taking an open source projects that doesn’t allow commercial use and sneaking it into a project.

Agreed. That said, NYT actually intentionally allows Google and Bing servers to parse their news articles in order to put their articles top in the search results. In that regard they might like certain form of processing by LLMs.

Alas, AI critics jumped onto the conclusion this one time. Read this:

Further, OpenAI writes that limiting training data to public domain books and drawings "created more than a century ago" would not provide AI systems that "meet the needs of today's citizens."

It's a plain fact. It does not say we have to train AI without paying.

To give you a context, virtually everything on the web is copyrighted, from reddit comments to blog articles to open source software. Even open data usually come with copyright notice. Open research articles also.

If misled politicians write a law banning the use of copyrighted materials, that'll kill all AI developments in the democratic countries. What will happen is that AI development will be led by dictatorships, and that's absolutely a disaster even for the critics. Think about it. Do we really want Xi, Putin, Netanyahu and Bin Salman to control all the next-gen AIs powering their cyber warfare while the West has to fight them with Siri and Alexa?

So, I agree that, at the end of the day, we'd have to ask how much rule-abiding AI companies should pay for copyrighted materials, and that'd be less than the copyright holders would want. (And I think it's sad.)

However, you can't equate these particular statements in this article to a declaration of fuck-copyright. Tbh Ars Technica disappointed me this time.

r/conservative not caring, yet gaslighting with BLM name calling these days. They have no shame.

Yeah, that's how many of them were installed there in the first place.

You made me wonder if Trump would pull out of NATO and ask a few NATO members to move to Russia-US alliance instead.

I feel bad for those brainwashed to their core by the CCP (and they actually hate the party).

Anyway, I have no idea whether Japan can retaliate against nuclear attacks, due to our naive pacifist constitution.

reframe[s] the conflict between rich and poor as one between young and old

TL;DR

I have a captcha idea...

I think voting, while important, is ineffective for fixing a political system. One man having the correct idea can't change anything by one vote.

I'm climbing my career ladder and starting to control good portion of company resources. At least, it has more potential than a single stupid vote. How to make use of that power I need to figure out, but as nobody knows the solution, the only route is to think while trying.

I live in Japan and I'm sure Kim literally considered nuking my country during that dick measurement contest Trump held.

Aligns well with my hypothesis: Apple designs their products for Americans, who treat them rough.

How do I get consent from an adult cow?

Can you share the studies you base your argument on? Those who live longer might also pay more tax, so it's not a clear cut for me.

A claim the beverage industry disputes.

I mean, if they really believed the sales wouldn't drop, why did they complain?

Took me a while to see what the article means by "radicalization" because these days radicalism can mean anything between far right antisemitism and the smallest critique on Israel.

Can't even trust the wording of BBC anymore when it comes to this.

Those far rights can't care less about reasons.