A lot of TnC’s have opt out forced arbitration. I do often read the TnC’s and follow the steps to opt out. It’s often as tedious as possible, like writing a letter, printing, and mailing it. Really depends though on whether it is some service I think I’ll be using often and that could have big negatives from not opting out like my bank account.

But OpenAI has received more than $13 billion in funding from Microsoft over the years, and that money has come with a strange contractual agreement that OpenAI would stop allowing Microsoft to use any new technology it develops after AGI is achieved

The real motivation is to not be beholden to Microsoft

Reminds me of freshman year in college… people would sneak into each others rooms and put it up on each other’s computers, trying to see if they could set a record for most spins.

A lot of metal heads I’ve known don’t use drugs or alcohol and some of them are vegans.

Most of these robots are backed by humans working remotely

The problem with ads is advertisers want to be able to target specific groups of people, which means the platform needs to violate your privacy to get that information.

Yeah, I’ve done similar. Bought a “all-in-one” tool kit that includes almost every basic tool. While it is nice to have one of everything, you quickly realize that the metal is so soft that some of them only last two or three uses. So, then you replace it with a better one.

I didn’t understand the importance of quality and the true premium you pay for certain things. I often would buy the cheapest thing I could find to serve a certain function. After awhile, you find yourself replacing cheap things because they wear out quickly. Buying quality can mean paying a lot more, but it also usually means you don’t have to replace it much, if at all.

Pretty sure they caught him in a lie or two

Thank god, give me my HMAC hash please.

Nothing more terrifying than losing your phone number these days because of all the accounts tied to it via 2FA.

I think you’re using the word fact in two senses here.

I am making an argument that ChatGPT and other AI models were created by copyrighted works and my “proof” is the “fact” that it can reproduce those works verbatim or state facts about them that can be derived from nowhere else but in the original copyrighted work or a derivative copyrighted work that used the original under fair use.

Now, the question is — is it fair use under copyright law, for AI models to be built with copyrighted materials?

If it is considered fair use, I’m guessing it would have a chilling effect on human creativity given that no creator can guarantee themselves a living if their style of works can be reproduced so cheaply without them once AI has been trained using their works as inputs. So, it would then become necessary to revisit copyright law to redefine fair use such that we don’t discourage creators. AI can only really “remix” what it has seen before. If nothing new is being created because AI has killed all incentive to make new things, it will stagnate and degrade.

Also, what games are really maxing out the ram? My impression is that most modern GPUs are overkill in this pretty stagnant video game market.

I think you’re missing the point. We are talking about whether it is fair use under the law for an AI model to even ingest copyrighted works and for those works to be used as a basis to generate the model’s output without the permission of the copyright holder of those works. This is an unsettled legal question that is being litigated right now.

Also, in some cases, the models do produce verbatim quotes of original works. So, it’s not even like we’re just arguing about whether the AI model stated some “facts.” We are also saying, hey can an AI model verbatim reproduce an actual copyrighted work? It’s settled law that humans cannot do that except in limited circumstances.

I haven’t watched regular tv in 15-20 years, with the occasional exception if I’m in a hotel. Mostly just stuck to streaming platforms in the last ten years, however my attention span for those has dwindled and I also just don’t really have the time or mental energy to watch much. I probably watch 1 movie per month, with one or two shows here and there. As a result, I’ve just cancelled almost all of my streaming packages.

Every once in a while I turn on actual television — usually when I stay in a hotel. I’m always completely blown away by the number of ads. It’s almost a joke at this point. Sorry. I don’t have the attention span for 5 minute ad breaks anymore. It’s like equal parts show and ads too.

Yeah higher wages would be great, but it doesn’t happen because the media loves to rake the government over the coals for such things. But, you know whose salaries don’t get scrutinized? Lobbyists.

You want to pay people enough to be able to resist these influences. Doing the actual work of governing should pay better than lobbying.

We should even pay congresspeople more. They make $174,000/year. But, when you adjust for inflation, that’s a lot less than they used to make.

Now there is a name I haven’t heard in awhile.

Yeah — pretty much this. Most people answering phones are interns. They’re given instructions to listen and be non-confrontational. They also won’t tell you what the congressperson’s view on the matter is. Ultimately, they have no power and just try to summarize what you said and put it in a computer program with your address so the office can mail you a letter from the Congressperson about the issue. These letters are generic to the topic you called about and generally try to say nothing controversial.

On rare occasions for really contentious issues, I saw them split the topic buckets into pro and con and send letters for each depending on whether you were for or against the thing you called about.

Mostly, I didn’t get the impression that Congress people pay much attention to phone calls. If the issue is contentious enough to divide the caller pool into pro/con, they might check a tally of the totals in each pool. But, for 99% of topics, they just send you a generic letter.

Also, a lot of these letters are full of bs. Congress people will often propose nice sounding bill names or cosponsor others that they can cite in these letters as evidence that they care. However, 99% of these bills go no where and often the congresspeople don’t even want them to. You’re upset about airplane noise over your city? “Well, I agree, that’s why I cosponsored the airplane noise reduction act.” Meanwhile, if that bill ever picked up steam the airline lobby would crush it and your congressperson would help them.

So, I don’t call my congressperson because I don’t really get the sense that it makes a difference. One thing I did see make a difference though was lobbyists. You see, they live right in Washington DC and rather than call, they schedule meetings with the actual paid staff or congressperson, not interns. They go right in their office and sit down and have a long chat. And, the staff have a big incentive to listen to them.

Most congressional staff are paid peanuts. They try to live off $25-45k/year in an expensive city and have 2 or 3 roommates. Some of them are often overqualified, holding law degrees and masters in their interest areas. So, once they get some experience and burn out of this life of poverty, guess who is happy to scoop them up? Yep, they go running right into the arms of those lobbyists and gladly take that $200k salary to go about fighting insulin price caps or defeating environmental regulations. It doesn’t even matter if they came into Washington, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed ready to take on these big corporate interests. By the time they’re 3-4 years in, realize they’re sick of eating ramen noodles, and the easiest way out is to call up some of those lobbyists and ask for a job, they do it. Oh you have a masters in agricultural policy with a specialization in organic farming? McDonald’s federal affairs office will hire you. I’ve seen it happen.

Snowden was a hero. Though, seeing him endorse RFK Jr. was a little questionable.

About as good as Lemmy.