Could you do an offline btrfs-check? (no --repair!)
Oh I'm sure the one I rode cost a lot more than that, I just took that as an example for a super basic bicycle. Point being that this super basic one was better in many ways than the fancy one at home.
I was also not talking about getting a "good" omafiets either; that was, like, the whole point.
I've driven "good" bikes all my life. Aluminium frame, disc brakes, fancy suspension, 3x9 gears. That sort of thing.
Wanna know what my best biking experience was? Riding a steel frame, 3-speed dutch-style rental omafiets with no suspension and regular-ass brakes on a vacation. That thing was hella comfortable, sturdy as a brick and convenient.
If I lived in a not fully car-brained city where you can safely bike and was tight on money, I'd absolutely buy an old cheap used regular-ass steel frame bike with no frills and use the hell out of it until it's irreparably broken. You can leave that thing standing in the rain, locked with just a frame lock (or perhaps even no lock at all) all without worrying that it might get damaged or stolen because there isn't much to damage or steal in the first place.
I also don't see how buying a "good" bike in any way helps the environment when the alternative is re-using something that's already been built and successfully used before.
I love my 2000€ Brompton that I daily-drive but I'd be nearly as happy with a 100€ bike like I described above. You don't get more bike when you go above that price point, you only get a more fancy bike.
Using it but not owning it sounds kinda gross in the context of toothbrushes tbh.
I’m no earplug connoisseur
7 paragraphs about earplugs
I don't know how it works in this case but if a commercial for-profit service is gratis, the general rule of thumb is that you are not the customer but the product.
Providing insight into how the teams at Valve work on Linux gaming things I presume.
I found it to be an interesting and entertaining read.
You should probably edit the title to reflect that this is about the Steam controller.
You'll be damned if you ever need to know what exactly you made it do 20 years ago though as Perl is a write-only language ;p
Diese Zahl sagt mir überhaupt nichts. "Erreicht" kann ja alles heißen. Wurde ich "erreicht" wenn ich irgendwann mal vor einem Jahr oder so 1µs mit NR verbunden war?
Komplett unnütz die Zahl.
Das Verhältnis von Zeit verbunden (s)/Zeit verbindungsbereit (s) über die gesamte Bevölkerung gemittelt wäre eine viel aussagekräftigere Metrik.
IANAL. TINLA.
The machine producing the derivative work is a thing which means it cannot have a copyright on anything. If it did anything original somehow, that work would be in the public domain.
The weights of the model would likely be considered a derivative work of the training data however because it was directly created using the training data. Thus, the copyright of the weights belongs to whoever owns the copyright to the training data.
The training data is created from thousands/millions/billions of individually copyrighted works. This would also constitute a derivative work too but there's an escape hatch: Fair use. If the use of the original works is transformative enough, the creator of the derivative work retains their copyright.
Collecting the data on which the weights are created is (somewhat) manual work done by humans. You could make good argument for this being fair use.
It all hinges on whether or not this is true. If it is, ML companies will continue as they did. If it isn't, the people creating the datasets would need to have to license the individual works they used for the training data from the respective copyright holders.
In practice, nothing is black and white and this is still a hotly debated topic for which no clear answer exists. None of this is court-tested to my knowledge.
OTOH: There's another legal question here: Is creating weights from training data fair use or a derivative work? If it's fair use, that'd mean whoever creates the weights gets the copyright which, in this case, is a machine; meaning nearly all ML models would be public domain.
Opinion and wild speculation:
Creating weights out of training data being fair use would be ..interesting but I doubt that will happen. It's sometimes even fairly obvious that some weights are a derivative work of their training data because you can make the weights reproduce training data very closely in some cases.
I am fairly certain that model weights will be considered a derivative work of the training data; copyright of the weights belongs to whoever owns the copyright to the training data.
What I suspect will happen on the training data front is that the collection and tagging will (at some point) be considered a transformative action, making it fair use.
I think this way because artists do not have a lobby, so even if the judiciary decided that collecting training data wasn't fair use, the rich tech companies will get their way because they can wooo the legislative using their """AI"""; creating new copyright exceptions such that aristocrat pockets can continue to be filled with peasant money.
Far more convincing is the contraposition: If collecting training data wasn't fair use, that would be to the benefit of the peasants; ML companies would have to license works from individual artists and pay them license fees. We can't have aristocrat money going into peasant pockets.
Wenn man das über die Lemmy-UI vervollständigen lässt, macht es automatisch einen Link daraus:
!aachen@feddit.de