The price difference is that google steals your data. That's it. OpenAI steals data, ask for money to use most of their models, and buy even more data from other companies stealing user data (like google and SO). Also indexing web pages is not even the "stealing" part of google, it's just not comparable.
Yes, training AI on user data for free then selling the end product is a reasonable thing to be concerned about. It'd be different if the product was free or the data was sold to them with user consent.
SO has announced a subscription-based service trained on user data for free, and not only there's not even opt-out, they're mass-banning users for trying to "opt-out" manually. Tell me one thing here that's not completely fucked up.
Agreed on that last part, making that the default would be a great solution. I could also use a signature in comments, like that guy who always puts the "Commercial AI thingy" but automatically.
Hard agree on this. Sell software and services to companies, only sell services to end users. I believe both selling your service as a dev and selling a service behind a free app are compatible with copyleft.
Earlier this week i ended up pirating some games i actually own because it was easier that way than the official one (which involved going through 3 freaking launchers for one game!), so there's the answer lol.
Trusting someone for convenience isn't ideal, but not everyone has the time and resources to audit, compile, and host a dumb frontend for yt. Most of the people here is good enough trusting literally anyone except a big tech company, including FOSS devs, the people who check the code, and public instances of their software. Even considering recent drama (solved by the community btw) I'd trust any FOSS project over google any day.
Once a software vendor demonstrates theyre untrustworthy, why would I risk using their products?
How are you using windows then? They've had innumerable security breaches, not to talk about how MS demonstrates again and again that the only thing they care about is money. Does "trustworthy" mean "american" or "only sells my data to the USA gov and other US companies" then sure, it is trustworthy as fuck.
Of course you will invalidate that with some mental gymnastics, but this same thing happens even with freaking usb (charge only, mind me) cables from aliexpress, with people saying they have fucking chips to spy on you. Again, racism.
And spare us from the sophist personal attack on people you disagree with
Try to put it however you want, but hating anything that comes from one place just because of that, then adding excuses is fucking racist.
except there's no question of there being significant Russian efforts to meddle in the US and other countries.
And here comes the grand patriotic justification for racism! If you really don't have shit to say about the actual software, just block me or something and spare me from your presence :)
I haven't found a serious critic that didn't rely on fucking racism yet. If the only real argument is "rUsSian cOmPAny bAD" but you're ok with USA companies, you're just braindead.
I don't even use windows for that same reason, but if a windows user asks me, based on past experiences with low end computers (where you can actually tell the diference), I'd always recommend kaspersky for performance and malwarebytes for precision.
Pro tip: Downvotes without arguments only prove my point.
Except WEBP, unlike (most versions of) JPEG, can be compressed without quality loss. This is probably a mix of reuploading a JPEG and a bad encoding by Lemmy's side. It should be fixed if you uploaded an already webp encoded image, so lemmy doesn't try to reformat it, but for a sequels meme it's not worth the time
What a bunch of greedy clowns. Not only that's illegal to do afaik, it's not even technically possible. Hell even if they could, that would accomplish absolutely nothing.
The only thing they could've try to pull was to ask spanish ISPs to block IPTV altogether, but then again, easily solved with a VPN. Stupid fight to pick if you ask me.
The price difference is that google steals your data. That's it. OpenAI steals data, ask for money to use most of their models, and buy even more data from other companies stealing user data (like google and SO). Also indexing web pages is not even the "stealing" part of google, it's just not comparable.
Yes, training AI on user data for free then selling the end product is a reasonable thing to be concerned about. It'd be different if the product was free or the data was sold to them with user consent.
SO has announced a subscription-based service trained on user data for free, and not only there's not even opt-out, they're mass-banning users for trying to "opt-out" manually. Tell me one thing here that's not completely fucked up.