esc27

Worst I’ve seen was “ruffies”, best was “lovle1”

What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

Ecclesiastes 1:9 (written over 2 thousand years ago…)

Updated Wednesday June 14 2:10 p.m. EST - San Francisco Police have provided this statement to Jalopnik:

“The SFPD is aware of the social media video showing an autonomous vehicle stopped in the middle of a road during a recent shooting incident in San Francisco. The autonomous vehicle did not delay police, fire, or other emergency personnel with our arrival or departure from this scene. Furthermore, it did not interfere with our investigation into the shooting incident.

An earlier version of this article was published in June 2021.

I’m not sure if I should be alarmed that this is happening frequently enough to recycle older articles or comforted that we’ve already dealt with this trouble once before.

May have something to do with tweets geting deindexed by Google

If the training data contains a lot of copyrighted material, then when the AI could end up trained to favor results that include parts That resemble copyrighted material.

How the copyrighted material was acquired could matter. If scraped with a valid API from social media, odds are the social media company claims a license to redistribute any content uploaded to it. But what if a lot of that content was uploaded illegally to begin with? The AI company could be unwittingly paying for stolen art. Or what if the AI company buys a curated collection of training data a different group put together? Odds are that may include copyrighted work, and the company selling it is unlikely to be licensed to do so…

A third issue is the intent of copyright. There is nothing natural or real about copyright. It is a concept we invented to aid creators so they can profit from their work and continue to produce more content which then benefits society. If AI art threatens that system, a court might decide protected art cannot be included in training data in order to maintain that intent.

Ban NSFW posts entirely. Require subreddits to pay to be private. Take over/shut down subs that don’t make enough ad revenue for their subscriber count. Corporate sponsored/run subreddits plus taking over popular subs to hand over to corporate sponsors. New premium currency to spend on enhanced up/down votes (10x effect normal votes, no limit to use on posts/comments). Newer Reddit to replace old and new Reddit. Updated app required to browse on mobile, requires notification permissions to run. Ban subreddit customization. Subs must allow image posts and use chat. Block linking to 3rd party image and video hosts.

I like the idea but I doubt it would work. Unless you want all laws signed with the comment:

bug fixes and stability improvements

This is (maybe) the “beginning” of the end for Reddit, not the “end” of the end. The big change isn’t Reddit, but here.

When Digg fell, everyone moved to Reddit. When this API situation started there was not an obvious new solution to move to. Lemmy/KBin were mentioned but not readily accepted due to concerns with the content and capabilities of the fediverse. That is changing quickly, and the next time Reddit screws up, we will have much more active communities, quality apps, and fewer bugs.

We need better solutions for proving identity online. Email, capcha, etc. are insufficient. I imagine a system similar to the certificate authority system, where you prove your identity to one of many trusted identity providers and then that provider vouches for you when you sign up for other services (while also protecting you anonymity.)

I think I’m starting to understand… If I go to an art gallery that allows photos, take some photos, and share them with a friend who is learning to be an artist, that seems to be generally ok and does not feel unethical. But if I take those photos to an underground sweatshop and use it to train a thousand people who are mass producing art for corporate use, that seems wrong.

If I think of the AI as a human analog, then I have trouble seeing the problem with it learning from the same resources as humans, but if I see it as a factory then I see the problem.

Not that AI should be treated with the same rights and dignity a person, but is this not a sort of double standard? I mean, do they publish games with art made by humans who learned from works the human artists did not own?

For me pain is multidimensional, there’s different kinds of “worst.” The short drop onto a hospital bed after surgery was by far the strongest, sharpest, brightest pain I ever felt, but it only lasted a millisecond. Kidney stones can be sharp and radiating, but the pain tends to be localized with ebbs and flows. Pancreatitis was not as “sharp” as a kidney stone, but it was bigger, harder to tolerate, more attention consuming, and came with aweful nausea.

One of the rare shows to actually live up to the hype and remain fairly consistent through out. I was worried the main plot wouldn’t live up to the first ep, but it held up and even exceeded that episode at times.

Solid episode to round out the season. Looking forward to season 2.

All the changes I’ve seen since the beta seemed to be end game focused at the expense of early game. Nice to see early game get attention for once.

Real progress and change takes work and money. Inflated social issues can be “solved” with policy. This whole mess is just policial theater that creates the illusion of governance at the expense of minorities.

Microsoft still sells single, non subscription licenses for Office. I think Windows is safe for the forseeable future, especially since they sell it to OEMs…

Theoretically you can amend the constitution at will if you control congress, the presidency, and one state legislature. You just carve up (for example) Texas to create another 150 states out of a rural area with each occupied by loyal party members. Then you admit them (only need a simple majority) and use them to push through any amendments you want. This would almost certainly trigger a civil war, but as far as I know it is legal.

The lost cause doctrine and related overall glorification of the u.s. civil war era confederacy. The fact that there are confederate statues in states that fought for the union is insane…

Maybe 25 years? But there should be an extra provision that the work must remain publicly available for purchase in like form and cost or else the copyright is voided (with a one year grace period to resolve production issues.)