Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — Riverheart

Riverheart

HN member
Joined
Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 3:59 PM UTC
HN karma
421
Public activity
367 items

About Riverheart

No profile information was provided.

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #45282913

    Well, from recent experience they could make “npm audit” usable without having to use a third party library like “better npm audit”. There’s no filtering or configuration at all. T…

  2. comment
    Comment #44009760

    Don’t think a lot of people are brushing their pet’s teeth. Fluoridated water benefits more than just humans.

  3. comment
    Comment #43809728

    I’m no anarchist, I simply acknowledge that civil disobedience exists. People are responsible for the risks they take in violating the laws they feel are unjust. Frankly, I have li…

  4. comment
    Comment #43803511

    The wall was a waste of tax payer money and purely theatric since it hasn’t helped. Saying illegal immigration is a problem today basically acknowledges as much if it weren’t also …

  5. comment
    Comment #43802617

    A systematic effort to dismantle the federal government bypassing the legislature entirely, replacing federal employees with people who pledge loyalty to the president over the con…

  6. comment
    Comment #43669222

    It’s not the style itself but the use of the art to train the model that outputs the style. Anime as a style is not copyrightable. The work anime artists create is copyrightable. S…

  7. comment
    Comment #43664710

    The capability of the model to infringe isn’t the problem. Ingesting unlicensed inputs to create the model is the initial infringement before the model has even output anything and…

  8. comment
    Comment #43664167

    “In the US, entirely deterministic works are not considered derrivative works as they aren't considered new creative works (if anything they are considered the same as the original…

  9. comment
    Comment #43663851

    Never proposed a ban, the issue is copyright, use licensed inputs and I could care less. Pro AI people need to stop behaving like it’s a foregone conclusion that anything they do i…

  10. comment
    Comment #43661683

    Nobody is trying to copyright an image hash and determinism matters because it’s why the outputs are derivative rather than inspired.

  11. comment
    Comment #43661581

    I’m not saying it’s better because it’s naturally occurring, the objective reality is that we live in a world of IP laws where humans have no choice but to retain copyrighted infor…

  12. comment
    Comment #43661524

    I’m in the camp that believes that it’s neither necessary nor desirable to hold humans and software to the same standard of law. Society exists for our collective benefit and we ma…

  13. comment
    Comment #43660326

    I’m saying that retaining information is a natural, accepted part of being human and operating in society. Don’t know why it needed to be turned into an Orwell sequel.

  14. comment
    Comment #43659716

    You know why we put up with copyrighted info in the human brain right? Because those are human beings, it’s unavoidable. This? Avoidable. Also, the model isn’t a human brain. Nobod…

  15. comment
    Comment #43659472

    You just chided people for having strong opinions about AI infringement without a court ruling to back them up but now you’re saying that creating/promoting an entire industry base…

  16. comment
    Comment #43658883

    “Not only that, they also assume or pretend that this is obviously violating copyright, when in fact this is a) not clear, and b) pending determination by courts and legislators ar…

  17. comment
    Comment #43658813

    The collection of the training data is the “scooping up” I mentioned. I assume you acknowledge the training data doesn’t spontaneously burst out of the aether? As for the model, it…

  18. comment
    Comment #43658253

    “A legal reality where you can only train AI on content you've licensed would be the worst for everybody bar massive companies, legacy artists included.” Care to elaborate? Also, s…

  19. comment
    Comment #43452996

    It makes sense if you don’t think of humans as tools and think of art consumption pre-AI. Very little would be made public if people thought their work would get scooped up to crea…

  20. comment
    Comment #43424103

    2 + 2 = 4 Nothing inspired or creative about it. It comes out the same every time no matter who calculates it. That’s what people want to copyright except the first 2 is other peop…

  21. comment
    Comment #43424061

    AI is always human until it isn’t. It’s not copyright infringement if the AI learned from input like a human but also it’s just a tool that can’t copyright its own output. It’s a m…

  22. comment
    Comment #43423177

    Why should you benefit over the people doing it the traditional way? What’s your argument for the government favoring the disruption of the art economy relied on by existing taxpay…

  23. comment
    Comment #43417191

    Copyright is a human construct designed to benefit humans. It doesn’t matter if the process is the same. AI doesn’t need to put food on the table, doesn’t pay taxes, and will never…

  24. comment
    Comment #43417063

    Software does not get inspired

  25. comment
    Comment #43214208

    Since it’s relevant to the discussion, here’s a repost of their latest response. https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/update-on-terms... On Wednesday we shared that we’re i…