81–90 of 250 posts
To clone from this:
wget https://web.archive.org/web/20230428163410embed_/https://litter.catbox.moe/gc4o73.bundle
git clone gc4o73.bundle gpt4freeEarlier quoted context omitted.
Time and time again. You are protected in your speech from the government . Commercial law does and will still apply. Arbitrary company decisions happen all the time, and GitHub makes it clear that they won’t refrain from deleting repos for whatever reason.
Well that's not correct. You are actually very protected in documenting security flaws, and even republishing them. I am unsure of who you think enforces laws... as far as I know OpenAI doesn't have their own police force yet. They can sue you of course, but they generally can't demand compliance with takedowns in this case without first going to a judge and requesting a court order. There is no "commercial law" unle…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not copyright but illegal data access and service use.
In exactly what respect is it illegal. Keeping in mind that "not complying with a corporation's policies" is not the same as breaking the law.
Actually, the law says that the Terms of Service is a legally-binding contract unless you can prove any provision is legally considered unconscionable. However, if that happens, all provisions except that provision still bind. It is illegal to break a legally-binding contract, and you can be sued or taken to arbitration at a minimum in a civil court for "breach of contract." And that's before any Computer Fraud and Abuse Act or Digital Millennium Copyright Act violations.
Yes, corporations don't sue users for "breach of contract" almost... ever. It's expensive, risky, has low compensation for doing so, and is just bad PR. But they legally always can.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well that's not correct. You are actually very protected in documenting security flaws, and even republishing them. I am unsure of who you think enforces laws... as far as I know OpenAI doesn't have their own police force yet. They can sue you of course, but they generally can't demand compliance with takedowns in this case without first going to a judge and requesting a court order. There is no "commercial law" unle…
I'm not a lawyer or even an American but that certainly isn't how the DMCA works. The takedown is issued against the hosting company and, if they comply, they have no further liability. If they don't comply, they are liable in court so, of course, they all comply.
Hint, that C letter is important!
I didn't know about this project. Thanks to the takedown notice I'll immediatelly clone it and start using it. Thank you OpenAI for playing a role in me finding an alternative!
It's been taken down, how can you clone it? Anyway if anybody has links to a mirror that'd be great. Still wondering why people don't self-host.
It's still available on github.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Time and time again. You are protected in your speech from the government . Commercial law does and will still apply. Arbitrary company decisions happen all the time, and GitHub makes it clear that they won’t refrain from deleting repos for whatever reason.
First amendment! Censorship! 2nd amendment for some reason! Yeah in all seriousness people trot out perceived constitutional infringements about 500x times more than it actually happens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In exactly what respect is it illegal. Keeping in mind that "not complying with a corporation's policies" is not the same as breaking the law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act
Bank of America used it to make people who simply changed the account number in their URL bar the criminals instead of them, who were completely incompetent at securing access to their customer's accounts. What previously would have been arguably criminal negligence.
It placed intent above competence - but only for those who can afford lawyers.
And here it is again, being abused the same way.
Hot take: It should be repealed completely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not a lawyer or even an American but that certainly isn't how the DMCA works. The takedown is issued against the hosting company and, if they comply, they have no further liability. If they don't comply, they are liable in court so, of course, they all comply.
What does DMCA stand for? Hint, that C letter is important!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Releasing code to use undocumented APIs is speech, and is regulated as such You have to run the code to violate the terms of use, which is primarily used to bar you from the service for misusing it.
Time and time again. You are protected in your speech from the government . Commercial law does and will still apply. Arbitrary company decisions happen all the time, and GitHub makes it clear that they won’t refrain from deleting repos for whatever reason.
But idk because i'm not a lawyer and we have copyright and ip laws so clearly congress can pass SOME laws that prohibit speech. Free speech absolutism is weird to me