641–650 of 761 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This implies training models is some sort of right.
Curious: are you trolling? Or do you really think doing math shouldn’t be a priori allowed to humans?
I can't help but feel like this is a huge win for Chinese AI. Western companies are going to be limited in the amount of data they can collect and train on, and Chinese (or any foreign AI) is going to have access to much more and much better data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i dont know that its such a great thing in the end. Uber/Lyft is 50-100% more expensive now than taxis were before. Theyre entrenched in different ways.
As far as I was aware taxis were an imagined thing we saw in movies. I understand you could call a number and ask for a ride to the airport though they were never useful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s very funny when people declare “piracy isn’t stealing”, as if the metaphor of piracy is all about singing and drinking. Copying and distributing works isn’t identical to theft (deliberately depriving someone of their property), but you’re enjoying someone’s work without compensating them, so it isn’t totally unlike depriving them of something . I guess it depends how you feel about refusing to pay a window washe…
> you’re enjoying someone’s work without compensating them Which is foreseen in societal decision: libraries (again and again). > refusing to pay a window washer The window washer is providing a service for a price, that service is not equivalent to knowledge production, and nobody has decided that that service (cleaning windows) should be done for free.
As for window washing vs knowledge production, not sure what you mean. Books have a price. Nobody’s decided they should be free either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But nobody was ever going to that Didn't Google have a long standing project to do just that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Books
From TFA The Google Books project also faced a copyright lawsuit, which was eventually decided in favor of Google. After contacting major publishers about possibly licensing their books, [former head of the Google Books project] bought physical books in bulk from distributors and retailers, according to court documents. He then hired outside organizations to dissemble the books, scan them and create digital copies th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ruling also doesn’t establish precedent, because it is a trial court ruling, which is never binding precedent, and under normal circumstances can’t even be cited as persuasive precedent, and the settlement ensures there will be no appellate ruling.
I thought it was precedentual within its circuit until an appellate says otherwise? And the the SC eventually joins in when two apellates disagree.
No, trial court decisions are never binding precedent, if they are “published” decisions, they may generally be cited as persuasive precedent. Appellate decisions (Circuit Courts in the federal system) are binding on the trial courts subordinate to that appellate court (and even on panels of the same appellate court) until reversed by the same court sitting en banc or by a higher court (the US Supreme Court in the federal system.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But nobody was ever going to that Didn't Google have a long standing project to do just that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Books
From TFA The Google Books project also faced a copyright lawsuit, which was eventually decided in favor of Google. After contacting major publishers about possibly licensing their books, [former head of the Google Books project] bought physical books in bulk from distributors and retailers, according to court documents. He then hired outside organizations to dissemble the books, scan them and create digital copies th…
See kids? Its okay to steal if you steal more money than the fine costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you’re enjoying someone’s work without compensating them Which is foreseen in societal decision: libraries (again and again). > refusing to pay a window washer The window washer is providing a service for a price, that service is not equivalent to knowledge production, and nobody has decided that that service (cleaning windows) should be done for free.
Libraries are great and authors get paid when you borrow the book. But we’re talking about piracy. As for window washing vs knowledge production, not sure what you mean. Books have a price. Nobody’s decided they should be free either.
In the standard system for libraries, the book is paid once.
That is "libraries" as in "we have societally decided to make published knowledge freely available".
> window washing vs knowledge production
Societies have not decided that window washing should be freely available - on the other side, they have decided that published knowledge be freely available (that is the meaning of the establishment of libraries).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well great so the Internet Archive is off the hook then. Also, at least so far, we don't call computers "someone".
> Archive is off the hook then Probably so, because with "library" I did not mean the "building". It is the decision of the society to make knowledge available. > we don't call computers "someone" We do instead, for this purpose. Why should we not. Anything that can read fits the set. -- Edit: Come up with the arguments, sniper.
there is an asimmetry between agreement and disagreement: the latter requires arguments.
"Sneering and leaving" is antisocial, and that is underlying most of downvoting.
Stop this deficient, improductive and disruptive culture.