111–120 of 137 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(sigh) Do you expect a reply when you start like this?
I don’t really care either way. I’m tired of having to debunk the same sloppy arguments year after year.
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine.
If you can't follow the guidelines it would probably better to remain quiet.
Note that this has the typical noncommercial "you have to pay for a membership to use commercially" Stability license.
Sigh: Stable Audio Open is an open source text-to-audio model [...] License: https://huggingface.co/stabilityai/stable-audio-open-1.0/blo... STABILITY AI NON-COMMERCIAL RESEARCH COMMUNITY LICENSE AGREEMENT Stability are one of the worse offenders for abusing the term "open source" at the moment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Another argument is that licensed data is whitewashed by being run through a model. So you could have GPL licensed code that is open source run through a model and then output exactly the same but because it has been outputted by the model it is considered "cleaned" from the GPL restrictions. Clearly this output should still be GPL:ed. I don't think anybody is making that argument. The NY Times claims to have gotte…
Both chatGPT and copilot will happily spit out blocks of code without any form of license. When you say "Every serious model has taken steps to prevent that sort of thing" do you mean they are hiding it or really changing the training data?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, friends also won't let friends skip the fact that circulating supply of ETH is now decreasing instead of increasing. Also, only ~30% tokens are staked. The 30% who chose to stake essentially tax the other 70% in use. Each of the validator do the same amount of work (ok, strictly speaking you get to do more when you have more ETH staked, but being a validator is cheap and does not cost significantly more energy…
> Also, only ~30% tokens are staked. The 30% who chose to stake essentially tax the other 70% in use. And in PoW miners tax 100% of holders. > what they receive is proportioned to how much they stake Wealthy miners with state of the art ASICS benefit more than some kid mining at home with an old GPU. Maintenance/cost of mining equipment benefits from economies of scale too. I hate being mean, but sorry, remembering t…
I'm less happy to pay someone a tax just because they are rich and they did barely anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Participating in staking is fully permissionless, stakers are not taxing non-stakers. They are being remunerated for their work. That's just a more polite way to say tax. Being permissionless is cool, but it's still tax in my dict. > There is something called opportunity cost. And, who is going to be able to have a larger percentage of their funds staked, a poor or a whale? You need a (mostly) fixed amount of liqui…
> And, who is going to be able to have a larger percentage of their funds staked, a poor or a whale? This is a truth that's fundamental to all types of investing. Advantaged people can set aside millions and not touch it for a year or five or twenty. Disadvantaged people can't invest $20 because there's a good chance they'll need it to buy dinner. Stocks, bonds, CDs, real estate, it all works like this. You've touche…
Wel, but at least in PoW you burn actual money (and in the end, actual resource) proportioned to your profit to keep the network running. In PoS you burn nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When will programmers get it through their thick skulls that an artist taking inspiration from a style and a well funded tech corporation downloading 400 million images to train on are two different things that shouldn't be compared. GPT is not a brain and humans correctly have different rights than computing systems.
I don't know how long you have been in HN, but I would recommend you familiarise with / refresh yourself on the community guidelines ( https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ). While HN looks and works similar to Reddit (and other such online communities), the tone and culture is not the same.
[edit] If not, what free and open ML tools that can be used for restoration / deconvolution / denoising are there?
> The new model was trained on audio data from FreeSound and the Free Music Archive. This allowed us to create an open audio model while respecting creator rights. This feels like the “Ethereum merge moment” for AI art. Now that there exists a prominent example with the big ethical obstacle (Proof of Work in the case of Ethereum, nonconsensual data-gathering in the case of generative AI) removed, we can actually have…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both chatGPT and copilot will happily spit out blocks of code without any form of license. When you say "Every serious model has taken steps to prevent that sort of thing" do you mean they are hiding it or really changing the training data?
How much code is needed for copyright to take effect? A whole program, a file, a block, a line, a variable name? Since there isn't a legally accepted answer yet, I am not sure what can be done other than litigating cases where it goes too far.
I think most people would agree that function is copyrightable if recreated verbatim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fail to see how the argument is ridiculous; and I'll bet that a jury would find the idea that "there is a copy inside" at least reasonable, especially if you start with the premise that "the machine is not a human being." What you're left with is a machine that produces "things that strongly resemble the original, that would not have been produced, had you not fed the original into the machine." The fact that there…
Having exact copies of the samples inside the model weights would be an extremely inefficient use of space, and also it would not generalize, unless it generated a copy so close to the original that it would violate copyright law if used, I wouldn't find it very reasonable to think that there is a memorized copy inside the model weights somewhere.
Again: Imagine two AI machines, different in one way: One of them has been fed "Article X" and the other hasn't.
You press buttons on the machine(s) in the same way.
The machine that was fed "Article X" spits out something that looks like Article X, and the one that wasn't, doesn't.
The magic inside, I don't think will much matter.