deathbird

joined 3 years ago
[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

The only org they call out by name is The Heritage Foundation.

I assumed that they were already skipping the parade.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)
  1. Idgaf about China and what they do and you shouldn't either, even if US paranoia about them is highly predictable.
  2. Depending on the outputs it's not always that transformative.
  3. The moat would be good actually. The business model of LLMs isn't good, but it's not even viable without massive subsidies, not least of which is taking people's shit without paying.

It's a huge loss for smaller copyright holders (like the ones that filed this lawsuit) too. They can't afford to fight when they get imitated beyond fair use. Copyright abuse can only be fixed by the very force that creates copyright in the first place: law. The market can't fix that. This just decides winners between competing mega corporations, and even worse, up ends a system that some smaller players have been able to carve a niche in.

Want to fix copyright? Put real time limits on it. Bind it to a living human only. Make it non-transferable. There's all sorts of ways to fix it, but this isn't it.

ETA: Anthropic are some bitches. "Oh no the fines would ruin us, our business would go under and we'd never maka da money :*-(" Like yeah, no shit, no one cares. Strictly speaking the fines for ripping a single CD, or making a copy of a single DVD to give to a friend, are so astronomically high as to completely financially ruin the average USAian for life. That sword of Damocles for watching Shrek 2 for your personal enjoyment but in the wrong way has been hanging there for decades, and the only thing that keeps the cord that holds it up strong is the cost of persuing "low-level offenders". If they wanted to they could crush you.

Anthropic walked right under the sword and assumed their money would protect them from small authors etc. And they were right.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 1 points 1 month ago

As explained, it's not even quite user identification, but rather verification of a unique individual. The ability to identify that an account is held by a unique person (as opposed to possibility being one of many puppet accounts) is pretty useful, particularly if it's not possible to backtrace it to an otherwise identifiable person.

Even so, the problem I see with this system is that a person has to be careful to never, ever, ever associate their unique ID with themselves, though there will be constant pressure to do so.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Even for those, it won't, because those people are either:

  1. Actually making decisions. or B. Jobs on paper for nepos.
[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Tbf, this is just declaration of intent to commit war crimes, not genocide.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 0 points 1 month ago

So first, even here we see foundation money and big tech, not government.

Facebook, Google, etc mostly love net neutrality, tolerate encryption, anf see utility in anonymous internet access, mostly because these things don't interfere with their core advertising businesses, and generally have helped them. I didn't see Comcast and others in the ISP oligopoly on that list, probably because they would not benefit from net neutrality, encryption, and privacy for obvious reasons.

The EFF advocates for particular civil libertarian policies, always has. That does attract certain donors, but not others. They have plenty of diverse and grassroots support too. One day they may have to choose between their corpo donors and their values, but I have yet to see them abandon principles.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)
[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 7 points 1 month ago

Further evidence that we're all just billions of microbes standing on top of each other in a trench coat.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 76 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Actually an interesting turn of events. Sounds like she'd been fighting hard to get it back, but they'd been fighting her on it.

Not sure what it all means, but there's something going on there. It's all very unusual.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

Still called the creeper though.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 148 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Ah this is terrible.

The bee population is already struggling, and there's no way this one survived after getting stuck in dude's throat.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Reportedly the dude was also a dick, and horrible to his ex-wife, but the bee didn't know that before it killed him.

This really shouldn't be news.

view more: ‹ prev next ›