Riskable

Just hoof it down to your nearest library and ask the librarian. They know how to horse around 🐴👍

Missing: The fact that Rotten Tomatoes scoring is easily gamed by the studios:

https://futurism.com/film-studios-manipulate-rotten-tomatoes

I use Kubuntu with KDE Connect. It lets me control everything using my phone 👍

I can play/pause whatever from my lock screen and can use my phone’s keyboard like it’s connected to the computer. It’s fantastic 👍

Dumb Restrictions on Media will always be Dumb Restrictions on Media.

We the people mostly won the DRM wars of the early 2000s. You do not want to legitimize that technology. It only helps big corporations/evil monopolies. It will never be a good thing for humanity as a whole.

I dunno. It’s better than their old, non-AI slop 🤷

Before, I didn’t really understand what they were trying to communicate. Now—thanks to AI—I know they weren’t really trying to communicate anything at all. They were just checking off a box 👍

My argument is that the LLM is just a tool. It’s up to the person that used that tool to check for copyright infringement. Not the maker of the tool.

Big company LLMs were trained on hundreds of millions of books. They’re using an algorithm that’s built on that training. To say that their output is somehow a derivative of hundreds of millions of works is true! However, how do you decide the amount you have to pay each author for that output? Because they don’t have to pay for the input; only the distribution matters.

My argument is that is far too diluted to matter. Far too many books were used to train it.

If you train an AI with Stephen King’s works and nothing else then yeah: Maybe you have a copyright argument to make when you distribute the output of that LLM. But even then, probably not because it’s not going to be that identical. It’ll just be similar. You can’t copyright a style.

Having said that, with the right prompt it would be easy to use that Stephen King LLM to violate his copyright. The point I’m making is that until someone actually does use such a prompt no copyright violation has occurred. Even then, until it is distributed publicly it really isn’t anything of consequence.

If we’re going pie in the sky I would want to see any models built on work they didn’t obtain permission for to be shut down.

I’m going to ask the tough question: Why?

Search engines work because they can download and store everyone’s copyrighted works without permission. If you take away that ability, we’d all lose the ability to search the Internet.

Copyright law lets you download whatever TF you want. It isn’t until you distribute said copyrighted material that you violate copyright law.

Before generative AI, Google screwed around internally with all those copyrighted works in dozens of different ways. They never asked permission from any of those copyright holders.

Why is that OK but doing the same with generative AI is not? I mean, really think about it! I’m not being ridiculous here, this is a serious distinction.

If OpenAI did all the same downloading of copyrighted content as Google and screwed around with it internally to train AI then never released a service to the public would that be different?

If I’m an artist that makes paintings and someone pays me to copy someone else’s copyrighted work. That’s on me to make sure I don’t do that. It’s not really the problem of the person that hired me to do it unless they distribute the work.

However, if I use a copier to copy a book then start selling or giving away those copies that’s my problem: I would’ve violated copyright law. However, is it Xerox’s problem? Did they do anything wrong by making a device that can copy books?

If you believe that it’s not Xerox’s problem then you’re on the side of the AI companies. Because those companies that make LLMs available to the public aren’t actually distributing copyrighted works. They are, however, providing a tool that can do that (sort of). Just like a copier.

If you paid someone to study a million books and write a novel in the style of some other author you have not violated any law. The same is true if you hire an artist to copy another artist’s style. So why is it illegal if an AI does it? Why is it wrong?

My argument is that there’s absolutely nothing illegal about it. They’re clearly not distributing copyrighted works. Not intentionally, anyway. That’s on the user. If someone constructs a prompt with the intention of copying something as closely as possible… To me, that is no different than walking up to a copier with a book. You’re using a general-purpose tool specifically to do something that’s potentially illegal.

So the real question is this: Do we treat generative AI like a copier or do we treat it like an artist?

If you’re just angry that AI is taking people’s jobs say that! Don’t beat around the bush with nonsense arguments about using works without permission… Because that’s how search engines (and many other things) work. When it comes to using copyrighted works, not everything requires consent.

The worm in his brain is just trying to reproduce 🤷

That’s why he brought his children.

Looks funny with a green hose and a yellow nozzle but a lot of bidet tools are just a spray nozzle on a (usually white-ish) hose. The nozzle is more of the kitchen sink variety but it’s really not that different.

The real problem with this setup is the hose and nozzle are under the seat! No reason for that… Just keep it off to the side.

TL;DR: This setup will work fine. Maybe use a light touch on that handle though 😉

I hate to break this to you but that means you’re not normal. If all you ever do in chat is talk about serious things that are of such earth-shattering importance that it would be incredibly rude and obnoxious for someone to post a silent looping video you’re not normal, and no fun at all.

The way Element currently works, it’s made for people like you… A strange minority that probably only thinks about “chat” in terms of communicating for an end goal and not for the pleasure of conversation.

Yeah it’s probably just a client side issue but the OP mentioned Element, specifically 🤷

I just wanted to point out that Element is no fun! No fun at all!

It works and it works great for what it does. Even voice and streaming are great with Element. It’s just got a terrible, no-fun interface and pointless limitations on things like looping videos. You can’t even configure it to make them play properly (as in, automatic and endlessly, the way they were meant to be played! 😤).

Looping videos and animated emojis are super fun ways to chat with people. Even in professional settings! It really breaks up the humdrum and can motivate people to chat and share more.

Element is all serious all the time and going into a chat channel there feels like a chore.

To be fair, both you and your friend can be correct 🤷

Element needs to be better. Discord is awesome with the way it auto-plays looping videos/gifs and has animated emojis.

Seriously: That’s all they’d need to do. The element devs need to focus on fun.

“I didn’t vaccinate my kids and the one that lived turned out fine!”

I think it’s part of a, “stabilizer diet”

I highly recommend not eating your keyboard. The most commonly-used macros probably taste like finger cheese.

It’s probably termites! Their nests tend to grow a mold that causes allergic reactions in lots of people. Exactly the sort of thing that would make you itchy.

I mostly use my computer for:

• CAD (both 3D modeling and circuit board design)
• Programming (mostly embedded firmware in Rust lately)
• Chatting because doing that on a phone is too slow and autocorrect sucks.
• Work (remote desktop, mostly)
• News
• AI tomfoolery with stuff like Stable Diffusion and LLMs.

Every now and again I’ll get addicted to a new game and use my PC for that too. My latest addiction was Baldur’s Gate 3 when it came out 🤷

Gold foil over shit

Soybeans are offended!