Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

variety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 484 posts

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#431

Post by k33n »

sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #430
k33n wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is evidence that Trump informed the FBI and local law enforcement about Epstein. You may not find it convincing, but the two aren’t mutually exclusive. History is an ordered list. Yes, Trump was friends with Epstein for a number of years. But then what happened? Yes, Trump knew Epstein was a creep. The documentation indicates that he did do something about it. You can yell at me and be rude all you’d like thoug…

If I was a rich and powerful person, and my rich friend was running a child sex trafficking ring, I would stop being friends with that person, immediately, once I knew about it. It's extremely clear that Trump did not do that. He continued the friendship. What would you do in that situation? I'd burn that friend to the ground, legally, socially, every way I could. I certainly wouldn't still be hanging around with him…

In reality, Trump stopped associating with Epstein when employees of his club complained about Epstein’s behavior. He also expelled him from his club.

My standards for human behavior are high. So high that I’m disappointed when people join in on slandering a person that doesn’t deserve it.

I’m sure it’s nice to imagine yourself as a brave person who would punish Epstein more than Trump did, but I guess we’ll never know if that’s true or not. I’d wager you’d probably just go along with whatever provided you the most social affirmation.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#432

Post by solid_fuel »

k33n wrote: post #351
solid_fuel wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It’s hilarious to me that you’re under the impression you speak for a lot of people and that your anger over my personal views is so vitriolic. You should also review the code of conduct for this website and learn to communicate in good faith if you expect to ever be taken seriously. Until then, I hope things get better for you man.

You’re the only one I see here crying about points, like a little child. If you want people to take anything you say seriously, you should learn to think and talk like a serious person. Until then I will give you all the respect you and your positions deserve: none.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#433

Post by sjsdaiuasgdia »

k33n wrote: post #431
sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was a rich and powerful person, and my rich friend was running a child sex trafficking ring, I would stop being friends with that person, immediately, once I knew about it. It's extremely clear that Trump did not do that. He continued the friendship. What would you do in that situation? I'd burn that friend to the ground, legally, socially, every way I could. I certainly wouldn't still be hanging around with him…

In reality, Trump stopped associating with Epstein when employees of his club complained about Epstein’s behavior. He also expelled him from his club. My standards for human behavior are high. So high that I’m disappointed when people join in on slandering a person that doesn’t deserve it. I’m sure it’s nice to imagine yourself as a brave person who would punish Epstein more than Trump did, but I guess we’ll never kn…

Keep drinking that kool-aid. Wow.

BTW we haven't even talked about the 100000 other things that make Trump a terrible person. Even if a timeline could be produced that fully exonerates Trump regarding Epstein (it can't), you'd still have so many other reasons he's a trash person.

You are not a good judge of character.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#434

Post by pixel_popping »

noxvilleza wrote: post #204
jcalvinowens wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I dont know how anybody stays sane without it. I have a list of over a thousand ASNs I blackhole at this point... Mine is a daily bash cronjob that fetches a text-based database and uses grep to build an nftables-apply script with all the IPs for the blocked ASNs. I keep meaning to share it, but it's embarrassingly messy I haven't had time to clean it up...

It's been a real game of cat and mouse over the last few years. I used to do daily iptables updates to block repeat scrapers on my small niche stats site I run. About 5-6 ago it become more common to see broader ranges - so I started blocking ASNs which worked great (esp for the regulars like Alibaba, Tencent, compromised DigitalOcean/OVH, ...). In the last 2-3 years though the overall bot traffic has skyrocketed - i…

Cloudflare is so easy to defeat and almost everyone in the scrapping industry is selling solutions that automatically bypass, hcaptcha solving is also really cheap nowadays.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#435

Post by k33n »

sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #433
k33n wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reality, Trump stopped associating with Epstein when employees of his club complained about Epstein’s behavior. He also expelled him from his club. My standards for human behavior are high. So high that I’m disappointed when people join in on slandering a person that doesn’t deserve it. I’m sure it’s nice to imagine yourself as a brave person who would punish Epstein more than Trump did, but I guess we’ll never kn…

Keep drinking that kool-aid. Wow. BTW we haven't even talked about the 100000 other things that make Trump a terrible person. Even if a timeline could be produced that fully exonerates Trump regarding Epstein (it can't), you'd still have so many other reasons he's a trash person. You are not a good judge of character.

You’re not saying anything I haven’t heard 100 times in the media. How many more “Trump bad” slanderous narratives that wind up debunked will you believe before you ask yourself if you were wrong?

I’m a really good judge of character. When folks don’t think for themselves, and instead join in on unfounded slander campaigns, it usually doesn’t speak well of their character.

I won’t join in. I don’t mind being insulted for it by random strangers on the internet. It’s a small price to pay for advocating for clear thinking and decent morals. If just one person questions their assumptions, then I’ve done my part.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#436

Post by goofy_lemur »

ben_w wrote: post #2

A lot of people would be very pleased if this leads to Zuckerberg getting even the statutory minimum damages ($750?) on each infringement. The previous infringement case with Anthropic said that while training an AI was transformative and not itself an infringement, pirating works for that purpose still was definitely infringement all by itself. The settlement was $1.5bn, so close to $3k for each of the 500k they pir…

I would be very pleased if Zuckerberg got away with it. I don't copyright or infringe, but honestly, he was the one guy of the big guys who released everything as open source.

If he did the right thing, then we should all support his choice to use it under fair use.

Freedom means that the state shouldn't punish a public benefactor.

It makes me furious to see programmers fighting against an open source hero.

If it was closed source for Meta profit, I understand.

But they gave it away free, so it infuriates me that people support damages for a public benefactor.

Churches and schools get free money from the government. We need a rule that open AI (not the company, I mean the actuality), can torrent whatever they want because it's for the public good.

Otherwise the rich companies win and can pay their sources and the small guys are screwed.

If Meta has to pay for their training data, they will need to profit from it and won't be able to offer it free.

Nobody in their right mind would ever support the publishers here.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#437

Post by protocolture »

eloisius wrote: post #369
protocolture wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, the comparable situation would be, being allowed to sell something you created on Windows. But in abstract you should absolutely be able to modify and sell windows.

To continue your analogy, I had to pay for Windows before I was allowed to create something with it, or acquire a license for under terms they set forth. If AI companies stopped at the public domain, then my argument wouldn't really hold up, but they didn't do that. They acquired everyone's copyrighted works without regard for the license and now they're, in the most charitable interpretation, using them to create de…

>To continue your analogy, I had to pay for Windows before I was allowed to create something with it, or acquire a license for under terms they set forth.

Yep and so far it looks like the issue with the meta case is they didnt pay for the book. Not that they used it in training data.

>in the most charitable interpretation, using them to create derivative works.

Yeah in the same way I use a hammer to create a derivative table.

>Someone is a human being with human rights, and if we're going to start pretending that training an LLM is in any way analogous to human consumption and creativity.

I dont care about that. Its simply a tool being built using existing tools. Like using a jigsaw to make a step ladder.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#438

Post by wasabi991011 »

butlike wrote: post #409
Nevermark wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is a different kind of worth, but it is not worth less because of it. This common argument to not take market cap valuations seriously doesn't hold. True, Meta as an entire entity is not liquid. A forced sale in entirety would produce a massive reduction in compensation. But that is a highly unlikely and contingent reduction. It is also true that if you have Meta's equivalent in cash, the value of the cash is…

Would it be accurate to say market cap valuations are intrinsically valuable because they drive people to buy shares by projecting success?

No, market cap is a representation of the expected future success, but share cost depends on this expectation. Higher expected future success, higher share cost. So, the only reason to buy shares is if you expect the market cap to increase.

(I think, someone please correct me of I'm wrong?)

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#439

Post by sjsdaiuasgdia »

k33n wrote: post #435
sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep drinking that kool-aid. Wow. BTW we haven't even talked about the 100000 other things that make Trump a terrible person. Even if a timeline could be produced that fully exonerates Trump regarding Epstein (it can't), you'd still have so many other reasons he's a trash person. You are not a good judge of character.

You’re not saying anything I haven’t heard 100 times in the media. How many more “Trump bad” slanderous narratives that wind up debunked will you believe before you ask yourself if you were wrong? I’m a really good judge of character. When folks don’t think for themselves, and instead join in on unfounded slander campaigns, it usually doesn’t speak well of their character. I won’t join in. I don’t mind being insulted…

Trump is a rapist, per the courts, per Ivana Trump, and per statements of Epstein victims.

Trump is the most corrupt president in US history, by a few orders of magnitude.

Trump lies continuously, obviously, ridiculously. Hell, how many times has the Iran war "ended" in the last 2 months, per Trump?

You do not have decent morals if you excuse Trump.

Fuck off with your calm fascist game.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#440

Post by protocolture »

gizajob wrote: post #383
protocolture wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>don’t use my book to train your LLM. What makes you think you are entitled to tell people what they can and cant do with data they purchased (or otherwise acquired) from you. Extremely honest question. I just cant put myself in your shoes. Like if I had written anything useful I would be overwhelmingly flattered that my content be considered so worthy for inclusion. Your profile suggests that you are a philosopher.…

A million dollars please. It’s called a copyright notice. Same as a license. If you’re running a commercial business you can’t legally just take that piece of work and reuse it. Pick any book off your shelf and pretty well every one of them will have words to the effect of: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopyi…

Well its not a solved issue in terms of law. But even still, I would have expected you to understand that I wasnt speaking legally.
Post reply on HN