5 ms·

> Besides, if users want permissivity and it doesn't exist, one of them can step up, make it, and be a hero. Or instead of that we can recognize that we live i

by stale2002 3y ago

> Besides, if users want permissivity and it doesn't exist, one of them can step up, make it, and be a hero. Or instead of that we can recognize that we live in a society and we can make rules that cause society to be better. We make laws all the time. And it is perfectly reasonable to make laws that increases peoples permissive ability to do whatever they want with things that they own. > Makers have no obligation to make things maximally permissive. Well, they would if we remove the "makers" ability to leverage the law to target users. If we take away their ability to use the government's monopoly on violence, we can effectively cause things to be much more permissive.

kelseyfrog 3y ago
I'm curious. It seems like the world is very maligned against your desires. How did this happen?
- stale2002 3y ago
  > It seems like the world is very maligned against your desires Oh it's not maligned against my desires! In my previous post I was referencing existing laws, and the existing ability of individuals in society to do basically whatever they want with things that they own. In the USA, consumers have large amounts of freedom, at least individually. The specific topic of model weights makes this even more clear. I have my own GPU, and nobody knows what I use model weights for, nor are they likely to stop me, (excluding some very rare but extreme edge cases obviously!). Isn't the USA great, and isn't it amazing that "makers" have basically no effective power to stop others from using their work in ways that the maker doesn't like? That's freedom for you.
  - kelseyfrog 3y ago
    How do you feel about terms of service or use contracts where individuals can freely enter into in order to use products?
    - stale2002 3y ago
      How I feel is that for physical products, and things that users individually own (ex model weights in this example), users right now can basically ignore terms of service and use contracts in the USA almost entirely and completely get away with it. And that's a good thing. That's the existing situation that we live in now, and it is a good thing that consumers can freely ignore the TOS on basically everything and do so constantly. The exceptions, are of course, if you are referencing online services with a TOS, but that bothers me less because it involves other people and other people's live services, whereas a TOS that involves something a single user has (like a physical object or even software on someone's own computer), individually, those TOS can be completely ignored right now. Isn't our existing freedom great? Also, do you acknowledge that I made strong arguments that directly addressed your question? Because you seem to just be ignoring the content of my post by just switching to a new question every time I fully answer one with strong arguments.
      - kelseyfrog 3y ago
        I eschew the idea that two people need to both take a position on a topic to/and debate it. In the most extreme version(and we're nowhere near this), someone can be proven wrong without the other person being proven right or even taking a position at all. To put it in the language we're using for this discussion, if it's part of the ToS to engage with you, then I'm free to disregard it. Freedom and all that :)
        stale2002 3y ago
        I will take this as an agreement that my arguments were strong and that I directly answered them with well thought out and supported ideas. Because, as we both know, if there was a problem with anything that I said then you would have pointed it out. So the absence of an objection is effectively an admission that you are in agreement that my points were strong. So I am glad that you agree with me!
        kelseyfrog 3y ago

kelseyfrog 3y ago

I'm curious. It seems like the world is very maligned against your desires. How did this happen?

stale2002 3y ago
> It seems like the world is very maligned against your desires Oh it's not maligned against my desires! In my previous post I was referencing existing laws, and the existing ability of individuals in society to do basically whatever they want with things that they own. In the USA, consumers have large amounts of freedom, at least individually. The specific topic of model weights makes this even more clear. I have my own GPU, and nobody knows what I use model weights for, nor are they likely to stop me, (excluding some very rare but extreme edge cases obviously!). Isn't the USA great, and isn't it amazing that "makers" have basically no effective power to stop others from using their work in ways that the maker doesn't like? That's freedom for you.
- kelseyfrog 3y ago
  How do you feel about terms of service or use contracts where individuals can freely enter into in order to use products?
  - stale2002 3y ago
    How I feel is that for physical products, and things that users individually own (ex model weights in this example), users right now can basically ignore terms of service and use contracts in the USA almost entirely and completely get away with it. And that's a good thing. That's the existing situation that we live in now, and it is a good thing that consumers can freely ignore the TOS on basically everything and do so constantly. The exceptions, are of course, if you are referencing online services with a TOS, but that bothers me less because it involves other people and other people's live services, whereas a TOS that involves something a single user has (like a physical object or even software on someone's own computer), individually, those TOS can be completely ignored right now. Isn't our existing freedom great? Also, do you acknowledge that I made strong arguments that directly addressed your question? Because you seem to just be ignoring the content of my post by just switching to a new question every time I fully answer one with strong arguments.
    - kelseyfrog 3y ago
      I eschew the idea that two people need to both take a position on a topic to/and debate it. In the most extreme version(and we're nowhere near this), someone can be proven wrong without the other person being proven right or even taking a position at all. To put it in the language we're using for this discussion, if it's part of the ToS to engage with you, then I'm free to disregard it. Freedom and all that :)
      - stale2002 3y ago
        I will take this as an agreement that my arguments were strong and that I directly answered them with well thought out and supported ideas. Because, as we both know, if there was a problem with anything that I said then you would have pointed it out. So the absence of an objection is effectively an admission that you are in agreement that my points were strong. So I am glad that you agree with me!
        kelseyfrog 3y ago