calcopiritus @ calcopiritus @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

593

Joined

2 yr. ago

Shouldn't being a convicted felon affect one's candidacy?

Should the US government also pay candidates to have aesthetic surgeries? Being ugly might affect their candidacy!

Iirc Ubuntu names their home files "Downloads", "Documents", and so on. Same with windows (there are a lot of uppercase letters in windows files). I've had issues with Cargo.toml before. And not just cargo, many config files use case to signal priority (so if both Makefile and makefile exist, Makefile will be used (or other way around)). Downloaded files are a gamble. Files created by user input (so for example if I wanted my user to be "Calcopiritus", my home would be "/home/Calcopiritus".

Uppercase letters might not be common in filenames, but they are not nonexistent.

Have you ever met a woman IRL?

I believe the game was 10 days old when they shut it down. There are no concord fans. You can't have fans in 10 days.

My guess is that they knew it was going to be a shit game, but realized too deep in the development phase. So they just released it as soon as possible and didn't waste more money on it (marketing). My guess is that the released it instead of cancel just in case they were wrong and people actually liked it.

They are not created by people. They are created by programs.

It is a supply and demand curve.

The supply is incredibly small for a world-famous artist compared to their demand. If the reason some people can't buy a ticket because there are no tickets left, there's room to increase the price of the ticket and sell the exact same amount of tickets. If resellers can just buy all your tickets and sell them for 10x the price, then you can 10x the price of tickets and sell the same amount.

The problem is that you can't just use the profits from selling Taylor swift tickets to make another Taylor swift so you can increase the supply of Taylor swift.

There are only 3 ways they can increase their Taylor swift profits: 1. Make concerts in bigger venues so they can sell more tickets. 2. Increase the ticket prices. 3. Increase the amount of Taylor swift concerts.

1. And 3. Have upper bound limits. Specially 3. Because what incentive do multi-millionaire artists to work more? If I were so wealthy, I'd strive to work less, not more.

The easiest option is 2. why wouldn't they do it?

Sure, if I was a music fan it'd suck, but the truth is that they are corporations, and they are legally required to increase the shareholders' value.

I can make MY files all lowercase, but 99.999% of files on my computer are not created by me. And some of them have capital letters.

Don't need evidence to support a feeling.

It doesn't make sense that they would only serve propaganda to right-wingers and tankies. Maybe they're focusing them because it's easier, but it wouldn't make sense to only do it to approximately half the population when they can do it to the full spectrum.

Or maybe there's evidence of the right wing because it was easier to catch.

We should all be critical of propaganda, if you think "ah, it's the other guys that are getting all the propaganda", you've just become an easier target.

We need to differentiate between those cases because they are 2 distinct cases. And they are very different.

They don't even have the same purpose. The purpose of a human learning is: fulfill a desire to learn or acquiring a new skill that will be useful to fulfill another desire. The purpose of AI learning is: increase the value of the model so it can be sold for more.

Lemmy is not an entity that is capable of thought. And I'm not Lemmy. I'm just another person and what you are reading is my opinion.

"Publishers are bad and greedy, therefore everything that hurts them is good for society" is a childish take imo. Not everything is black and white. Copyright exists for a reason. Just removing it won't make the world better. A law being flawed doesn't make it worse than not existing.

Don't need to get philosophical about what is the difference between human and AI learning.

"Consumed by AI" and "consumed by a human" are two distinct use cases that can have different terms in a license.

Media is not exactly like cheese though. With cheese, you buy it and it's yours. Media, however, is protected by copyright. When you watch a movie, you are given a license to watch the movie.

When an AI watches a movie, it's not really watching it, it's doing a different action. If the license of the movie says "you can't use this license to train AI, use the other (more expensive) license for such purposes", then AIs have extra fees to access the content that humans don't have to pay.

So because you don't understand it, everything it does should be legal?

It's not rare maths. There are trns of thousands of AI experts. And most CS graduates (millions) have a good understanding on how they work, just not the specifics of the maths.

Yeah, they're not selling a copy, they are just selling a subscription to a copying machine loaded with the information needed to make a copy. Totally different.

I should start a business of printers and attach a USB with the PNG of a dollar bill. And of course my printers won't have any government mandated firmware that disables printing fake money.

I'm not printing fake money! It's my clients! Totally legal.

Yeah. A human right.

I'm sure 99+% of them knew, but I'm not ruling out someone waking up to: "what? But the company that was paying me millions to convince people that Ukraine was the enemy was based in Illinois! There's no way they they were Russian". Every time I underestimate the stupidity of people they tend to surprise me, so I no longer do.

Yeah, making sandwiches also costs money! I have to pay my sandwich making employees to keep the business profitable! How do they expect me to pay for the cheese?

EDIT: also, you completely missed my point. The money making machine is the AI because the copyright owners could just use them every time it produces copyright-protected material if we decided to take that route, which is what the parent comment suggested.

Why would they limit themselves to serve propaganda only to left wingers when they can also serve propaganda to right wingers. And centrists, and fascists and tankies and anarchists. I'm pretty sure they're trying with the full political spectrum.

To be fair. I don't think it's impossible that some of these were so stupid to even realize that the ones paying them were Russian.

If the solution is making the output non-copyrighted it fixes nothing. You can sell the pirating machine on a subscription. And it's not like Netflix where the content ends when the subscription ends, you have already downloaded all the not-copyrighted content you wanted, and the internet would be full of non-copyrighted AI output.

Instead of selling the bee movie, you sell a bee movie maker, and a spiderman maker, and a titanic maker.

Sure, file a copyright infringement each time you manage to make an AI output copyrighted content. Just run it on a loop and it's a money making machine. That's fine by me.

When you copy to consume yourself it's way different than when you copy to sell the copy for a lower price.