silverbax @ silverbax @lemmy.world

Posts

20

Comments

224

Joined

2 yr. ago

1. Buy Brother, better printers without all this subscription garbage.
2. How long before an 'open source' printer hots the market and terrifies this idiot CEO?

"I am going to step on this rake again and again, harder and harder, until the rake no longer slaps me in the face when I step on it."

I have wondered what the GOP will do when they lose again with Trump. If they do what they've done in the past, they will learn the wrong lessons and try to make up for it with more illegal power grabs.

100% hard agree. The media has gotten into a cycle of 'here's the crazy thing Trump did/said today!!!!' Followed by 'Trump is taking us right into a dictatorship and there's nothing anyone can do, be afraid!!!'

Meanwhile all the actual electoral vote polling show Trump losing to Biden worse than he did last time. Just go vote, people, in every election, every time. I don't want people to be complacent but the numbers look terrible for Trump.

I would forgive it, if he didn't misspell words in everything he posts and wasn't running for Governor of a U.S. state. None of the other candidates misspell words in their posts, ever.

Yes, one of his GOP opponents is running ads right now in North Carolina pointing this out.

These idiots always work until they try to get paid.

This man has declared bankruptcy FOUR TIMES. He has been under investigation for the past two years because he used campaign donations to pay off personal debt, among other things.

He shouldn't be anywhere near running a state or in charge of any budget, near a budget, or even be allowed to see a budget.

He has also praised Hitler on social media.

Oh, and he misspelled the word 'leach' (leech) in his post because WHY WOULD WE NEED PEOPLE RUNNING THE GOVERNMENT WHO CAN ACTUALLY SPELL SIMPLE FUCKING WORDS like a third grader could.

I'm not clear on why on-air talent for a show wouldn't be eligible to be credited if the show won an Emmy.

Basically an executive at ESPN wanted the on air talent to get statuettes too, so he submitted fake names, had them re-engraved and gave them to them to the on air people.

Not much of a scandal.

Exactly, just more propaganda. Remote work is the future.

He has always just been a trust fund kid, pretending to be a business magnate. He had enough money via inheritance to fly around in a private jet, wear terribly fitting suits, make appearances wherever he could and claim to be wildly successful. It was all an act.

Yes, I am with you! I have always hated it, it's such an American thing to do, not understand our own fucking language.

This is a fantastic article.

Yes, it says, 'don't buy depreciating assets' and 'buy things that appreciate in value, opposed to blowing all your money on consumer items.'

If that sounds like advice you've heard before from many other places, it's because it's not new, it was just wrapped in a good title. It's astonishing how much a book with a good title can sell if it lands just right.

Thanks for your response. I realize I muddied the waters on my question by mentioning exact copies.

My real question is based on the 'everything is a remix' idea. I can create a work 'in the style of Banksy' and sell it. The US copyright and trademark laws state that a work only has to be 10% differentiated from the original in order to be legal to use, so creating a piece of work that 'looks like it could have been created by Banksy, but was not created by Banksy' is legal.

So since most AI does not create exact copies, this is where I find the licensing argument possibly weak. I really haven't seen AI like MidJourney creating exact replicas of works - but admittedly, I am not following every single piece of art created on Midjourney, or Stable Diffusion, or DALL-E, or any of the other platforms, and I'm not an expert in the trademarking laws to the extent I can answer these questions.

I think this is a difficult concept to tackle, but the main argument I see about using existing works as 'training data' is the idea that 'everything is a remix'.

I, as a human, can paint an exact copy of a Picasso work or any other artist. This is not illegal and I have no need of a license to do this. I definitely don't need a license to paint something 'in the style of Picasso', and I can definitely sell it with my own name on it.

But the question is, what about when a computer does the same thing? What is the difference? Speed? Scale? Anyone can view a picture of the Mona Lisa at any time and make their own painting of it. You can't use the image of the Mona Lisa without accreditation and licensing, but what about a recreation of the Mona Lisa?

I'm not really arguing pro-AI here, although it may sound like it. I've just heard the 'licensing' argument many times and I'd really like to hear what the difference between a human copying and a computer copying are, if someone knows more about the law.

So, 95% chance that humans will cause human extinction.

And humans created AI, so even if AI does in the human race, it will still have been humans.

I guess if humans go extinct, it's close to 100% due to humans.

Best part of the article:

"Goel’s scheme was uncovered in an in-depth investigation by reporter Allie Conti in 2019, who detangled the plot after being double-booked at one of his properties in Chicago and receiving a suspicious last-minute cancellation. Conti was contacted by the FBI days after the article was published."

I wish there was more of this. Good investigative journalism has been one of the most powerful weapons in justice, and I fear it's diminishing rapidly.