Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)F

FatCrab

@ FatCrab @lemmy.one

Posts
0
Comments
169
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • OpenAI Execs Mass Quit as Company Removes Control From Non-Profit Board and Hands It to Sam Altman

    Jump

  • Their non-profit status had nothing to do with the legality of their training data acquisition methods. Some of it was still legal and some of it was still illegal (torrenting a bunch of books off a piracy site).

  • Yep, it's going to make everything more expensive

    Jump

  • Except, more likely, there are few available competitors to the tarriffed product and now the consumer covers the increased cost. Meanwhile, local alternatives, where they are available, price up because, well they had market when the pre-tarrif import was available and their own delta was what it was, so they can push the price up to just capture more profit with the same or still larger market, depending on the good.

    The point is that deploying the sort of policy is incredibly tricky in the best of circumstances, and still likely to do more harm than help. And that you think, of all people, someone as very obviously stupid as Trump is capable of threading that needle is beyond baffling.

  • Yep, it's going to make everything more expensive

    Jump

  • Yea, those are bad, too. Are you under the impression that we just don't have enough of them and that's the issue?

  • Trump Says He’ll Bring Back ‘Travel Ban’ and Will Ban Refugees From Gaza

    Jump

  • So hold no one accountable and don't try to model future behaviors based on past actions and statements? I guess it's better to grab performative notes from Twitter.

    At the end of the day, the likelihood of survival for any given Palestinian drops dramatically with trump as president as compared to Harris. Does this mean Harris is doing everything or will do everything she should? Absolutely not. But if you actually give a shit about people's lives, then, yes, strategic voting, particularly in this case, is necessary mitigating action. Or maybe you don't actually care about humans living or dying and are, like I said, just engaging in social media fueled performative bullshit to justify apathy and laziness.

  • Beersheba girl suspended from school after voicing concern for Gazan kids

    Jump

  • Historically, bedouin have been seen as a distinct ethnic/cultural group, separate from the surrounding ones. Basically, they're similar to the Roma of Europe and my understanding is that they're treated and viewed by local communities very similarly as to what the Roma go/have gone through.

  • Republicans Boost Jill Stein as Potential Harris Spoiler

    Jump

  • But Walz is a Democrat?

  • ‘Useful Idiot for Russia’: DNC Decides to Go Off on Jill Stein

    Jump

  • In addition, people act like she isn't also the acting VP during this campaign. It would be extraordinarily problematic for the VP to actively undermine the policy of the president with whom they are serving even if their own presidential policy would be significantly different.

  • Palworld maker vows to fight Nintendo lawsuit on behalf of fans and indie developers

    Jump

  • Oh wow, this suit is shaping up to be silly. I didn't realize it was filed in Japan, too. That makes the patent aspect even shakier. Japan has no discovery process like in the US, which is generally very necessary for many software-related patents as, assuming they have a strong likelihood of surviving challenge, they are typically drawn to processes that are completely obfuscated from the user and outside observes.

  • Palworld maker vows to fight Nintendo lawsuit on behalf of fans and indie developers

    Jump

  • There is an era of patents from the late 90s through the early-mid-00s that were insanely vague and rarely stand up to scrutiny, but most are expiring at this point, if they haven't already. Generally, though, patents are not granted on "concepts" but on implementations. That's a sometimes ambiguous line, but that's a fundamental principle of modern patents.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • My point is just that they're effectively describing a discriminator. Like, yeah, it entails a lot more tough problems to be tackled than that sentence makes it seem, but it's a known and very active area of ML. Sure, there may be other metadata and contextual features to discriminate upon, but eventually those heuristics will inevitably be closed up and we'll just end up with a giant distributed, quasi-federated GAN. Which, setting aside the externalities that I'm skeptical anyone in a position of power to address is equally in an informed position of understanding, is kind of neat in a vacuum.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • Yes, it's called a GAN and has been a fundamental technique in ML for years.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • The straw thing is super interesting (all of it is really-- thanks for this explanation). I wonder if there is a way to do in-situ biochar of the straw that isn't just setting the field on fire.

  • I can't put my finger on the problem here...

    Jump

  • I'm reading it now. I recommend the book as well!

  • Israel’s siege now blocks 83% of food aid reaching Gaza, new data reveals

    Jump

  • Yes, Hamas should be blamed for seizing and refusing to release hostages effectively gained via an ill conceived pogrom that no one could possibly have expected to have had any different of an outcome than it has had. The most accurate and reasonable observation that I saw after the October raid was simply, "Hamas just shot every Palestinian in the dick."

    With that said, none of this excuses Israel and the IDF's response, regardless of his predictable it has been. Nor does it excuse an increasingly ethnofascist apartheid state.

  • OpenAI releases o1, its first model with ‘reasoning’ abilities

    Jump

  • I think if you can actually define reasoning, your comments (and those like yours) would be much more convincing. I'm just calling yours out because I've seen you up and down in this thread repeating it, but it's a general observed of the vocal critics of the technology overall. Neither intelligence nor reasons (likewise understanding and knowing, for that matter) are easily defined in a way that is more useful than invoking spirits and ghosts. In this case, detecting patterns certainly seems a critical component of what we would consider to be reasoning. I don't think it's sufficient, buy it is absolutely necessary.

  • OpenAI releases o1, its first model with ‘reasoning’ abilities

    Jump

  • Genetic algorithms is a sort of broad category and there's certainly ways you could federate and parallelize. I think autoML basically applies this within the ML space (multiple trainings explore a solution topology and convergence progress is compared between epochs, with low performers dropping out). Keep in mind, you can also use a genetic algorithm to learn how to explore an old fashioned state tree.

  • Harris to begin 'more aggressive' post-debate campaigning stage, campaign says

    Jump

  • Not great, so people should continue to apply pressure. And not just over Palestine, but over all MIC capture of our government. Otoh, this administration and hopefully Harris' will continue it is one of the most union friendly in living memory and the FTC has been insanely active. If we're lucky, we might even see the return of the CFPB as a legitimate and effective entity. So your characterization is beyond brain dead.

  • Reuters- Putin says West will be fighting directly with Russia if it lets Kyiv use long-range missiles

    Jump

  • The actual entry into Afghanistan and overwhelming of local forces was wildly fast? The majority of our time in Afghanistan wasn't slowly advancing on Kabul. It was failing miserably to build a coherent state sympathetic to US interests amidst a mad dash of privatized MIC interests maximally extracting revenues from the US.

  • The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates

    Jump

  • Like I've said, you are arguing this into nuanced aspects of copyright law that are absolutely not basic, but I do not agree at all with your assessment of the initial reproduction of the image in a computer's memory. First, to be clear, what you are arguing is that images on a website are licensed to the host to be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only and that such downstream access may only be non-commercial (defined very broadly--there is absolutely a strong argument here that commercial activity in this situation means direct commercial use of the reproduction; for example, you wouldn't say that a user who gets paid to look at images is commercially using the accessed images) or it violates the license. Now, even ignoring my parentheses, there are contract law and copyright law issues with this. Again, using thumbs and, honestly, I'm not trying to write a legal brief as a result of a random reply on lemmy, but the crux is that it is questionable whether you can enforce licensing terms that are presented to a licensee AFTER you enable, if not force, them to perform the act of copying your work. Effectively, you allowed them to make a copy of the work, and then you are trying to say "actually, you can only do x, y, and z with that particular copy--and this is also where exhaustion rears its head when you add on your position that once a trained model switches from non-commercial deployment to commercial deployment it can suddenly retroactively recharacterize the initial use as unlicensed infringement. Logistically, it just doesn't make sense either (for example, what happens when a further downstream user commercializes the model? Does that percolate back to recharacterize the original use? What about downstream from that? How deep into a toolchain history do you need to go to break time traveling egregious breach of exhaustion?) so I have a hard time accepting it.

    Now, in response to your query wrt my edit, my point was that infringement happens when you do the further downstream reproduction of the image. When you print a unicorn on a t-shirt, it's that printing that is the infringement. The commercial aspect has absolutely no bearing on whether an infringement occurs. It is relevant to damages and the fair use affirmative defense. The sole query of whether infringement has occurred is whether a copy has been made and thus violated the copyright.

    And all this is just about whether there is even a copying at the training of the models stage. This doesn't get into a fairly challenging fair use analysis (going by SCotUS' reasoning on copyrightability of API in Oracle v Google, I actually think the fair use defense is very strong, but I also don't think there is an infringement happening to even necessitate such an analysis so ymmv--also, that decision was terrible and literally every time the SCotUS has touched IP issues, it has made the law wildly worse and more expensive and time-consuming to deal with). It also doesn't get into whether outputs that are very similar to works infringe in the way music does (even though there is no actual copying--I think it highly likely it is an infringement). It also also doesn't get into how outputs might infringe even though there is no IP rights in the outputs of a generative architecture (this probably is more a weird academic issue but I like it nonetheless). Oh, and likeness rights haven't made their way into the discussion (and the incredible weirdness of a class action that includes right of publicity among its claims).

    We can, and probably will, disagree on how IP law works here. That's cool. I'm not trying to litigate it on lemmy. My point in my replies at this point is just to show that it is not "basic copyright law bruh". The copyright law, and all the IP law really, around generative AI techniques is fairly complicated and nuanced. It's totally reasonable to hold the position that our current IP laws do not really address this the way most seem to want it to. In fact, most other IP attorneys I've talked to with an understanding of the technical processes at hand seem to agree. And, again, I don't think that further assetizing intangibles into a "right to extract machine learning from" is a viable path forward in the mid and long run, nor one that benefits anyone but highly monied corporate actors either.