“X”, I only need to tap it three times to get what I want.

FOSTA-SESTA, short for the “Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act” and the “Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act,” are U.S. laws passed in 2018 aimed at combating online sex trafficking.

If anyone else was curious.

Even jellyfish can learn to spot and dodge obstacles, and they literally don’t have a brain.

AI has a vibrant open source scene and is definitely not owned by a few people.

A lot of the data to train it is only owned by a few people though. It is record companies and publishing houses winning their lawsuits that will lead to dystopia. It’s a shame to see so many actually cheering them on.

“It’s raining cats and dogs.”

Somehow, heavy rain is represented by a downpour of household animals.

If you treat arson and planting a bomb the same, you just end up with more people planting bombs.

They won’t be rewarded. Data brokers, record companies, publishing houses, getty, etc will be rewarded.

You want to shoot open source initiatives in the face and give a handful of companies a monopoly, so rich people can get richer.

seeing the huge amount of data needed for competitive generative AI, then open source AI cannot afford the data and dies.

How does that change if copyrights are strengthened? The open source scene dies and the big players will still keep scraping.

AI has always been able to train on copyrighted data because it’s considered transformative.

If this changes, seeing the huge amount of data needed for competitive generative AI, then open source AI cannot afford the data and dies. Strengthening copyrights would force everyone out of the game except Meta, Google and Microsoft.

The system that open source AI grew out of is exactly what is being attacked.

Those authors aren’t in the equation anymore. They gave their work to publishing houses and won’t be asked about what it is to be used for.

Because if AI has to pay, you kill the open-source scene and give a fat monopoly to the handful of companies that can afford the data. Not to mention that data is owned by a few publishing house and none of the writers are getting a dime.

Yes it’s silly that students pay so much, but we should be arguing for less copyrights so we can have both proper prices in education and a vibrant open source scene.

Most people argue for a strengthening of copyrights which only helps data brokers and big AI players. If you want subscription services and censorship while still keeping all the drawbacks of AI, this is how you do it.

Me on my way to vandalize a tesla

Most just abstained, voters who actually switched sides don’t exist imo. If you voted trump last election, you never would have voted kamala even if she actually tried to win.

That being said, I can’t really blame people for drawing the line at genocide of all things. The dems thought they had an easy win so they decided to represent genocide instead of us, the voters. I still voted for them regardless but it felt altogether gross. It shouldn’t feel that way, they are supposed to be the good ones.

I don’t think we should condone the behavior by pivoting the blame to voters, who are just trying to be heard since clearly the democratic party has stopped listening.

It’s a romance too. Not sure how you flirt as a fish.

The best would be to have recorded audio that slowly goes down in volume, with the tone at full blast at the end

The video is 15 minutes long and at the four-second mark flashes a screenshot from Zoolander, in which the protagonist unveils the “Center for Kids Who Can’t Read Good.”

It also features a punchy techno backing track while wasting the reviewer’s time with approximately 14 minutes of inactivity.

Sorry, I was talking about HiQ labs v. Linkedin. But there is Google v. Perfect 10 and Google v. Authors Guild that show how scrapping public data is perfectly fine and include the company in question.

An image generator is trained on a billion images and is able to spit out completely new images on whatever you ask it. Calling it anything but transformative is silly, especially when such things as collage are considered transformative.

Training on publicly available material is currently legal. It is how your search engine was built and it is considered fair use mostly due to its transformative nature. Google went to court about it and won.

Believe it or not, getting votes is also part of their job. It’s an integral part of the system and usually works if they actually try to represent us.