221–230 of 484 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 2024, voters signaled that they don't care about corruption when they reelected the most corrupt administration in American history. Since then, there has been a widespread understanding that the rich will not face consequences in this country. For example, take a look at the Trump administration's suppression of the Epstein files. Or the Trump families cryptocurrency schemes. Or the ridiculous ballroom. Anyway, t…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it grating that so many AI boosters try to frame pushing back against the AI industry as a sudden about-face for everyone that spent the last 20 years pushing back against the copyright industry. I’m also in favor of decriminalizing or legalizing small amounts of pot for personal use. That doesn’t mean I’m behind industrialized narcotic production on such a huge scale that it that it starts to distort the econ…
Speaking of ai and meth, have you seen videos of the palantir CEO Alex karp? Dude looks like he's regularly getting the same meth shots Hitler used to get. But I hear you. One of my biggest tells that someone can't be reasoned with is when they resort to whataboutism without any consideration for how 2 situations can actually be different even if there is some commonality. It's a powerful bad faith argument technique…
Funny how people are suddenly on Elsevier's side. It's clear to me that AI training is transformative fair use under existing law. Maybe this will be the case to prove it.
I also find it funny, I said this regarding the other thread and article[0] '"They then copied those stolen fruits" How are these fruits "stolen" if they still have what was allegedley stolen? Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985): The Supreme Court ruled that the unauthorized sale of phonorecords of copyrighted musical compositions does not constitute "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" goods under the Nat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also find it funny, I said this regarding the other thread and article[0] '"They then copied those stolen fruits" How are these fruits "stolen" if they still have what was allegedley stolen? Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985): The Supreme Court ruled that the unauthorized sale of phonorecords of copyrighted musical compositions does not constitute "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" goods under the Nat…
Cool cool cool. So all the code and data you send to anthropic and chatgpt should be mass distributable to forward other peoples arts and science? All your meeting notes with ai summarizers, slack chats with bots? Might as well put your entire company and all plans for it on github mit licensed. Ill take a peek, see if there's anything valuable to me in that. Don't worry you can keep it all on your github too. It's s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Speaking of ai and meth, have you seen videos of the palantir CEO Alex karp? Dude looks like he's regularly getting the same meth shots Hitler used to get. But I hear you. One of my biggest tells that someone can't be reasoned with is when they resort to whataboutism without any consideration for how 2 situations can actually be different even if there is some commonality. It's a powerful bad faith argument technique…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's frustrating is all those kids who got criminal charges for running MP3 sites back in the day [1], and this guy rips off every piece of media in existence and will walk away literally because he's too rich to be charged. [1] See, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oink%27s_Pink_Palace#Legal_pro...
What's frustrating is that I don't even consider infringement to be a crime. Why are you all so upset about this, rather than his real crimes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
It is a leap of faith that they are speaking in good faith as a useful idiot.
Can someone explain why are we reading this instead of "Meta was fined for copyright infrigement" news?
Except, as the article says.... it's not copyright infringement. Whether it should be or not is another issue.
>But the latest lawsuit alleges that Meta and Zuckerberg deliberately circumvented copyright-protection mechanisms — and had considered paying to license the works before abandoning that strategy at “Zuckerberg’s personal instruction.” The suit essentially argues that the conduct described falls outside protections afforded by fair-use provisions of the U.S. copyright code.
The title is clickbait at it's worst. The situation around copyright and AI is stock standard "CEO makes a decision in an area that is clear as mud".