Why do I get the feeling millions of people are going to start losing their jobs over this in the next few years?
Because that's what's going to happen.
I don't think they'll be directly replaced with AI though. Instead the company they work for will go bankrupt because they can't compete with competitors who figure out how to improve productivity using AI.
Sure but who is at fault?
If I manually type an entire New York Times article into this comment box, and Lemmy distributes it all over the internet... that's clearly a breach of copyright. But are the developers of the open source Lemmy Software liable for that breach? Of course not. I would be liable.
Obviously Lemmy should (and does) take reasonable steps (such as defederation) to help manage illegal use... but that's the extent of their liability.
All NYT needed to do was show OpenAI how they go the AI to output that content, and I'd expect OpenAI to proactively find a solution. I don't think the courts will look kindly on NYT's refusal to collaborate and find some way to resolve this without a lawsuit. A friend of mine tried to settle a case once, but the other side refused and it went all the way to court. The court found that my friend had been in the wrong (as he freely admitted all along) but also made them pay my friend compensation for legal costs (including just time spent gathering evidence). In the end, my friend got the outcome he was hoping for and the guy who "won" the lawsuit lost close to a million dollars.
The Mac I use is a few years old and available secondhand for under $500. You can get the same CPU/GPU in an iPad which is available, brand new, for $600. I think that's a reasonable price for a school computer.
I'm guessing you've never used an ARM Mac.
They don't look all that fast on GeekBench (more on that in further down) but in real world usage they are incredibly fast. As in an entry level 13" school homework laptop will have performance on par with a high end gaming PC with a thousand watt PSU.
I don't have a high end gaming PC to compare, but I do have a mid-range one and I've stopped using it... my laptop is so much faster, quieter, cooler, that even though the PC has more games... I just put up with the modest selection (about half the games I own) that run on a Mac. It's not just gaming either... I'm also able to compile software perfectly fast, I can run docker with a dozen containers open at the same time without breaking a sweat (this is particularly impressive on the Mac version of Docker which uses virtual machines instead of running directly on the host), and stable diffusion generates images in about 20 seconds or so with typical generation settings.
The best thing though is I can do all of that on a tiny battery that lasts almost an entire day under heavy load and multiple days under normal load. I've calculated the average power draw with typical use is somewhere around 3 watts for the entire system including the screen. It's hard to believe, especially considering how fast it is.
On the modest GeekBench score Apple ARM processors have - it's critical to understand GeekBench is designed to test very short bursts and avoid thermal throttling. Intel's recent i9 processors, with good cooling, will thermal throttle after about 12 seconds and GeekBench is designed to avoid hitting that number by doing much shorter bursts than that. Apple's processors not only take far longer to thermal throttle, they also "throttle" by reducing performance to barely lower than full speed.
But even worse than that - one of the ways Apple achieves incredible battery life is they don't run the processors at high clock rates for short bursts. The CPU starts slow and ramps up to full speed when you keep it under high load. So something quick, like loading a webpage, won't run at full speed and therefore GeekBench also isn't running at full speed either.
A third difference, and probably the biggest one, is Apple's processor has very fast memory and also massive memory caches which are even faster. Again that often doesn't show up on CPU benchmark because it's not really measuring compute power. But real world software spends a massive amount of time just reading and writing to memory and those operations are fast on Apple's ARM processors.
You really can't trust the benchmarks when you're comparing completely different processors. You need to try real world usage, and the real world usage difference is game changing. Trust me, when proper fast processors (not just a laptop running with a phone CPU) are available on PCs, everyone will realise Mac users were right - ARM is way better than x86. This isn't like AMD vs Intel. It's more like HDD vs SSD.
Essentially if you combine hydrogen with oxygen, you get water. This chemical reaction happens naturally when the two are exposed to each other and produces heaps of energy which can easily be controlled and used for anything else.
One way to produce hydrogen is to take water, and heaps of energy, and "split" the water into hydrogen and oxygen. You can just release the oxygen into the air (since you'd be making too much to sell it).
The cost largely comes down to where you get your energy from. As solar gets more and more widely deployed, some countries now have more energy during the day than they can use - the price of power in those countries is not just close to zero sometimes it's negative. The grid will literally pay you to use the electricity during peak production. Since it's cheaper to provide power than shut down infrastructure that will be needed again in a few hours.
At that point, all you need to produce hydrogen is water. The power is free. And it doesn't need to be pristine water either - ocean water is fine.
Hydrogen itself is perfectly clean - it produces water or steam. The debate over wether or not it's "clean" is all about the energy used to produce it and that is changing as our electricity grid moves to zero emission power sources. One of them being hydrogen — which is a great way to fill in gaps when solar and wind aren't producing power.
It's FUD. There's literally more than a dozen different ways to produce hydrogen.
Yes, right now, the cheapest options are some of the "dirtier" ones, however the cost to produce zero emission hydrogen is coming down rapidly and fossil fuel produced hydrogen is going up in price.
The two are expected to cross over in the next few years and green hydrogen, typically using solar power to split seawater, will be the cheapest way to produce hydrogen and nobody in their right mind would get it from any of the more expensive sources.
Right now there is nobody in the world doing large scale zero emission hydrogen production. However a bunch of massive hydrogen production plants are being built right now and clean hydrogen is expected to become widely available starting next year. Several of the plants opening in the next couple of years will produce hundreds of tons of hydrogen per day. With zero emissions.
Keep in mind this is a trial of a fuel-cell powered data center. They're just testing the technology to see how well it works, and if it works well, by the time they actually start deploying it widely they will be using hydrogen that has zero carbon emissions.
OK but what monopoly do they have? I can't even think of one, let alone two.
Windows, for example, is about 29% of web traffic, putting them in second place behind Android... and Apple is also bigger than Windows if you don't split the fruit companies operating system up based on wether or not it has a touch screen (seems like a silly distinction to me).
There are clearly three players with about a third of the market each in the OS space. What's the other one? Microsoft Office? Isn't that like 20% of the market?
I think it's the exact opposite.
Microsoft was arguably the most powerful company in the world when they were hit with the antitrust lawsuit which absolutely crushed the company. It was never going to destroy Microsoft, but it knocked them way down and things were looking pretty grim.
They cleaned up their act, have been making great decisions for the last 20 years and are now a far bigger and better company than they ever were in the old days. I think that's proof that being "parasitic, anti-competitive and anti-consumer" was a bad strategy.
I think it's more than just outsourcing. You can do outsourcing right...
I've read a report ages ago that they outsourced it to companies half way around the world with a terrible timezone overlap, which made it impossible for people at Boeing to collaborate effectively, so corners were cut to meet deadlines.
The fact they cut corners to meet deadlines is particularly concerning. They should have just accepted a delay.
I've switched to the Arc web browser, where tabs behave more like bookmarks (and they replace bookmarks as well). It's been a game changer for me - my favourite feature is the ability to close a window and it doesn't remove any of your tabs. Just open a new browser window and they're back. My tabs are also more organised than ever.
Large Language Models, specifically ChatGPT+, are now part of my daily life and I'm not just talking tech. For example I use it in the kitchen every time I cook a meal I haven't made a thousand times before and I've been cooking better than ever. Unlike a recipe website, you can tell it you don't have (or don't like) a particular ingredient and chat about alternatives, then it will update the cooking instructions. Love it.
I've given up on streaming music services, and gone back to occasionally buying a new DRM free albums. This has been part of a general cost cutting theme to my year - especially monthly bills.
Consider a typical afternoon commute for a parent - you go from work to your kids school to some after school activity (different destination every day) to a few grocery stores then back to the after school activity and then finally home. If you have three kids... now you're going to three afternoon activities. And maybe two schools as well.
Sounds like it'd take about 5 hours with public transit, especially since for some of those you'd literally be getting off the bus stop, then 5 minutes later be back at the bus stop waiting for the next bus. Kids aren't allowed to wait at bus stops these days... whoever is looking after the kid will only release them when the parent comes in to pick them up. Often the parent even has to type their password into a system that checks if they are approved to pick up the kid (most kidnappings crimes are committed by family, often a parent, and staff aren't expected to keep on top of that... so they use databases).
I love public transit. But major cultural changes would be required for it to be my main form of commute.
And with a plugin model Prius... you won't use the ICE power unit at all on a typical commute (25 mile battery range on the current models).
It's both. Nearly all ICEs are specifically optimised to cruise at 50mph. Anything more or less will significantly reduce your MPG.
But yeah, slow speeds are really inefficient in an ICE.
A lot of people really don't like Eich. When he was promoted from CTO to CEO of Mozilla, half of Mozilla's board resigned (one said it was because she refused to be a member of the board that appointed him, the other two didn't say why they resigned) and there was a massive campaign to get rid of him including websites showing popups to all FireFox users telling them to use another browser - specificially because of Eich.
He lasted 11 days as CEO of Mozilla, and founded Brave after leaving.
Since then, he's done things with crypto and said things about covid which have angered people even more.
It's far more effective in an EV. With an ICE about 80% of the energy is just generating heat so you've only really got the remaining 20% that you can influence.
It's not a best case scenario - it's a precisely repeated series of accelerations, cruising with a specific amount of resistance applied to the wheels, and braking.
It won't match any real world drive. In the real world there are other variables, traffic, wind, hills, speed limits, etc. It's also intended to be a fairly typical highway drive, so in ideal conditions you will do better than the EPA range. Down hill, for example, the cybertruck can drive forever (unlike an ICE, which is so inefficient it uses energy even going down hill).
Um... that's your example of a "wild" keyboard? I would've gone with a "Steno" keyboard. Which is inspired by the custom keyboards used in court houses to write transcripts. Typing on them is crazy fast too.
Thanks for your response
Always happy to discuss copyright. :-) Our IP laws are long overdue for an overhaul in my opinion. And the only way to make that happen is for as many people as possible to discuss the issues. I plan to spend the rest of my life creating copyrighted work, and I really hope I don't spend all of it under the current rules...
The US copyright and trademark laws state that a work only has to be 10% differentiated from the original in order to be legal to use
The law doesn't say that.The Blurred Lines copyright case for example was far less than 10%. Probably less than 1%, and it was still unclear if it was infringement or not. It took five years of lawsuits to reach an unclear conclusion where the first court found it to be infringing then an appeals panel of judges reached a split decision where the majority of them found it to be non-infringing.
Copyright is incredibly complex and unclear. It's generally best to just not get into a copyright lawsuit in the first place. Usually when someone accuses you of copyright infringement you try to pay them whatever amount of money (in the Blurred Lines case, there were discussions of 50% of the artist's income from the song) to make them go away even if your lawyers tell you you're probably going to get a not guilty verdict.
Huh? What does being non profit have to do with it? Private companies are allowed to learn from copyrighted work. Microsoft and Apple, for example, look at each other's software and copy ideas (not code, just ideas) all the time. The fact Linux is non-profit doesn't give them any additional rights or protection.
It's absolutely part of the lawsuit. NYT just isn't emphasising it because they know OpenAI is perfectly within their rights to do web searches and bringing it up would weaken NYT's case.
ChatGPT with web search is really good at telling you what's on right now. It won't summarise NYT articles, because NYT has blocked it with robots.txt, but it will summarise other news organisations that cover the same facts.
The fundamental issue is news and facts are not protected by copyright... and organisations like the NYT take advantage of that all the time by immediately plagiarising and re-writing/publishing stories broken by thousands of other news organisations. This really is the pot calling the kettle black.
When NYT loses this case, and I think they probably will, there's a good chance OpenAI will stop checking robots.txt files.