this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
61 points (95.5% liked)

TechTakes

2520 readers
85 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 27 points 6 days ago (5 children)

What is that thumbnail supposed to be...

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 33 points 6 days ago (2 children)
[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 13 points 6 days ago

Mickse Moutse

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 3 points 6 days ago

Quatsch, no ring.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 25 points 6 days ago

a Mickey Mouse camera, obviously

[–] lettruthout@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The internet has ruined me.

[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 14 points 6 days ago

Are you feeling all torn open about it?

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 7 points 6 days ago

Mickey Moatse

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 8 points 6 days ago

Butthole of the Mouse.

[–] NaibofTabr 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I suspect the timing of this has a lot to do with the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the appeal regarding copyright for AI-generated visual art, which effectively upholds the Copyright Office's determination that copyright only applies to human-created works.

If Disney (or any other prospective customer) can't claim copyright over anything a generative model might produce, then it has no commercial value.

Yeah, that's definitely part of it, I think. That, combined with OpenAI's inability to make an actual ROI just made it a non-starter. I hope to see more of this in the future.

[–] lurker@awful.systems 11 points 6 days ago

Cheers, I'll drink to that

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 9 points 6 days ago

And there was much rejoice!

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago