Hmm. There was some kind of issue with that in the EU that led to the creation of a Creative Commons license, IIRC. Maybe nonstandardized handling of stuff not under copyright. I remember that in the US, putting something in the public domain wasn't an issue, but in at least some of the EU, it was important to use Creative Commons instead.
I think that something not being under copyright isn't analogous everywhere.
In 2009, Creative Commons released CC0, which was created for compatibility with jurisdictions where dedicating to public domain is problematic, such as continental Europe.[citation needed] This is achieved by a public-domain waiver statement and a fall-back all-permissive license, for cases where the waiver is not valid.
Maybe Google uses geographic location as an input, and it was just some other correlating factor, like people in your area, rather than a global trend.
Yeah, I think that there may be something like that -- the ability to prove things with a camera is useful -- but it's gonna be more-complicated than just that. It's consumer hardware. If you just do that, someone is gonna figure out how to extract the keys on at least one model and then you can forge authenticated images with it.
The unemployment line there makes for quite the mental image.
The “Erect Horse Penis - Concept LoRA,” an image generating AI model that instantly produces images of women with erect horse penises as their genitalia, has been downloaded 16,000 times, and has an average score of five out of five stars, despite criticism from users.
Google has fallen second place to Apple in the Android vs. iPhone war for the first time in over a decade.
From a global perspective, Apple's dominance is an outlier. The US, Canada and Japan are the only countries where Apple has an edge over Android. Everywhere else Android leads, usually by a wide margin.
And, I gotta say:
But this has also brought a rising tide of elitism, as some US iPhone owners perceive Android as cheaper and inferior.
I think that maybe, the point where one's favored platform has slightly under 50% marketshare in an -- admittedly large -- country is maybe just a bit premature to start wallowing in victimhood.
It doesn’t help Android OEMs that Apple makes it exceptionally difficult to leave its ecosystem or switch between platforms. For starters, the company’s services are either exclusive to its platforms (iMessage) or woefully underbaked on Android (see Apple TV Plus and Facetime)
iOS is more of a walled garden, that's true, but Google is not entirely innocent here either.
The world population is at 7.8 billion and on a steady increase.
It will, however, soon reach a peak and then enter decline. However, that's not the relevant factor -- people in Country A aren't going to cover pensions or education subsidies or the like in Country B. You need individual countries to have something on the order of a sustainable population. That means that the combination of fertility and immigration (if the country has positive immigration; some countries, like many of those in Eastern Europe, have serious net outflow) needs to be sufficient to sustain that country's population.
You can do some of it with immigration, and in the US, we've done quite a bit, but as can be seen by the political response to the European migrant crisis -- a swing to the far right -- populations get pissy when one pulls in more than a certain rate of immigration. So there's only so much you can do via immigration.
EDIT: Oh, if you were responding to my comment as to "decrease", I was responding to a comment about fertility rate decrease, which is what the article said -- that is decreasing everywhere. I'm not saying that population is decreasing everywhere, not yet.
where fertility rates are supposedly in decline
They are in decline everywhere
The world population is at 7.8 billion and on a steady increase.
Global population will start to decrease as a result of that too. But that's a trailing factor.
Population collapse is the biggest threat to civilization,” accompanied by a list of countries where fertility rates are supposedly in decline
They are in decline everywhere, and it is a serious issue at the levels that it has hit in many countries. It's way, way below the 2.1 TFR required to sustain a population, which means you wind up with an inverted population pyramid, and a lot of old people needing to be supported by a few young people.
Europe isn't actually the worst-off place -- South Korea, Japan, and East Asia plummeted down even sooner.
Last time I was looking, they were one of the few laptops that I've seen that come with a trackpad with three mechanical buttons. Linux makes better use of three buttons than some other environments, and I like mechanical buttons.
There may be other vendors out there now that also do so.
It's actually not very easy to break car windows out from inside a car without a tool. You can do it, but it's harder than you'd think (like, I wouldn't want to try doing it in a car which fell into a lake or something).
Ehhhh. This isn't as exciting as you might think for, say, graphics. It's predicated on the fact that in the case, there's no human involvement.
Howell found that “courts have uniformly declined to recognize copyright in works created absent any human involvement,” citing cases where copyright protection was denied for celestial beings, a cultivated garden, and a monkey who took a selfie.
“Undoubtedly, we are approaching new frontiers in copyright as artists put AI in their toolbox to be used in the generation of new visual and other artistic works,” the judge wrote.
The rise of generative AI will “prompt challenging questions” about how much human input into an AI program is necessary to qualify for copyright protection, Howell said, as well as how to assess the originality of AI-generated art that comes from systems trained on existing copyrighted works.
But this case “is not nearly so complex” because Thaler admitted in his application that he played no role in creating the work, Howell said.
They're just gonna nail down the line judicially on how much human involvement is required and then they'll have a human do that much.
I mean, AI tools are gonna be just increasingly incorporated into tools for humans to use.
It might be significant for something like chatbot output, though.
I think that some of it is that most people don't really carefully analyze the sum total what a politician has said or is saying and all the other related material. Which is reasonable -- I mean, I know that this is a politics forum, but for most people, following politics is not a huge part of what they do. It'd be really inefficient, in fact, if they did.
I think that a lot of support for politicians has more to do whether they've made statements that a potential voter agrees with in the very limited material about them that that voter sees. Not just for Trump, but for any politician.
So if you're asking someone about Trump, they're making something of a gut call based on the limited material they see of him.
Honestly, I think that the more-interesting issue here isn't really Trump, but the fact that Trump's tactics have worked fairly well. The problem here isn't really Trump. He's just a symptom of having a political decision process that can be gamed the way he's gamed it. We do not want to encourage politicians who lose an election to have an incentive to make bogus claims that the election was rigged, because part of what we want the political system to do is to permit coming to a consensus as to leadership. That undermines that.
But there's nothing unique about Trump that permits him to do that. If he could do it, then so could another politician. And I would imagine that sooner or later, more people probably will, if they think that it is to their advantage.
That is, I think what probably needs to be fixed is the system.
I mean, scrolling down that list, those all make sense.
I'm not arguing that Google should have kept them going.
But I think that it might be fair to say that Google did start a number of projects and then cancel them -- even if sensibly -- and that for people who start to rely on them, that's frustrating.
In some cases, like with Google Labs stuff, it was very explicit that anything there was experimental and not something that Google was committing to. If one relied on it, well, that's kind of their fault.
tal @ tal @kbin.social Posts 11Comments 458Joined 2 yr. ago
Hmm. There was some kind of issue with that in the EU that led to the creation of a Creative Commons license, IIRC. Maybe nonstandardized handling of stuff not under copyright. I remember that in the US, putting something in the public domain wasn't an issue, but in at least some of the EU, it was important to use Creative Commons instead.
I think that something not being under copyright isn't analogous everywhere.
googles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-domain-equivalentlicense