← Feed

Posts

• View post

  He's also not some kind of mind-controlling supervillain. He was saying things that the people were happy to latch onto and wanted to believe.

• View post

  Immediately after the big announcements about Mythos there were followups by other teams that were able to find most of the same vulnerabilities with other existing models. I think the main takeaway there was that it's just a matter of actually *looking*. Anthropic's advantage may have been in the framework that let them do so in industrial-scale quantity rather than the cleverness of the particular model they used. This sort of security scan is still new and important to pay attention...

• View post

  > You seem to have forgotten that this is a social media website comments section discussion, not a court of law. And you are forgetting that it's a discussion *about* a court of law. It's right in the title, this is about a lawsuit. You're presenting a big wall of text that's explaining your opinions on the matter. I could likewise present a big wall of text that explains my opinions on the matter. Neither of those things actually *matter*, though. The title and subject of...

• View post

  That's not what this case was about.

• View post

  Ah, this is Thaler v. Perlmutter. I seem to have picked up a reputation in these parts as being "pro-AI", so I'm not sure how my view will be interpreted, but Thaler is basically a loon. This case is not really over whether *AI art* can be copyrighted. It's about whether AI itself can *hold* copyright. ie, Thaler isn't arguing "I hold the copyright to this piece of art." He's arguing "*my AI* holds the copyright to this piece of art." Since AI is n...

• View post

  Am engineer. I use AI features in browsers, and know several others who also do. I'm looking forward to trying additional features Mozilla's going to be bringing in the future. Basing your view of what *everyone* does on what *everyone you know* does is a perfect way to amplify the effects of a social bubble.

• View post

  Tick tock, unfortunately.

• View post

  The companies that continue with human staff where others are replacing theirs, for example. Outsourcers providing those staff.

• View post

  No, we fight to ensure that the rules are followed. In this case they are, the judge has discretion here. Would you rather there were "mandatory minimum" laws when it came to this as well?

• View post

  Whereas I prefer an organized rules-based justice system over anarchy and vigilantism. Because who knows when you or I might end up being in the "disliked" category?

• View post

  But don't you see? We don't like these particular people, so they should suffer the maximum possible penalties under every circumstance. If we liked them then punishing them for wearing glasses would of course be a travesty.

• View post

  Depends entirely on the circumstances of where it does end up being built. I'm not sure what "gotcha" you think you're making here? That Reddit comment is just me pointing out that when a business uses electricity they pay for it.

• View post

  It's weird how AI has turned so much of the internet from its generally anti-copyright stance. I've seen threads in piracy and datahoarding communities that were riddled with "won't someone please think of the copyright!" Posts raging about how awful AI was. I maintain the same view I always have. Copyright is indeed broken, because of how overly restrictive and expansive it has become. Most people long ago lost sight of what it's actually for.

• View post

  If they do it's not by the actual training of AI.

• View post

  Simple.wikipedia isn't a summary of regular Wikpedia, it's a whole separate thing. It's intended to convey the same data, just in a simpler way.

• View post

  The problem being discussed here is not the availability of Wikipedia's data. It's about the ongoing maintenance and development of that data going forward, in the future. Having a static copy of Wikipedia gathering dust on various peoples' hard drives isn't going to help that.

• View post

  Wikipedia's traditional self-sustaining model works like this: Volunteers (editors) write and improve articles for free, motivated by idealism and the desire to share knowledge. This high-quality content attracts a massive number of readers from search engines and direct visits. Among those millions of readers, a small percentage are inspired to become new volunteers/editors, replenishing the workforce. This cycle is "virtuous" because each part fuels the next: Great content leads...

• View post

  I like that one, very thorough.

• View post

  LLMs were trained on our social media feeds, after all...