CRConrad

65 ms·

961.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> The average attorney is just like the average person, except he passed a difficult test. My best friend is a lawyer, so heck knows how difficult that test can be -- he passed it. ;-)
962.
by CRConrad 2y ago
GP: > I have worked for multiple startups (Malwarebytes... Note the "have worked" and the rather long list of places they've worked. If that list is in chronological order (sure didn't look alphabetical), Malwarebyt
963.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Yeah, but the law still sets the default baseline for he judge / jury / whatever. In the Nordic countries (at least Sweden) -- as techno-modern and bureaucratic as they may be -- that still includes verbal agreements. (The hands
964.
by CRConrad 2y ago
From OpenAI's "fuller statement": > “We're incredibly sorry that we're only changing this language now; it doesn't reflect our values or the company we want to be.” Yeah, right. Words don't necessarily
965.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Yeah, that would be stupid AF. Hope you have a better one sometime soon.
966.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> Even if they did. How does that matter? How the heck could that not matter?!? Making the voice similar enough that the public will associate it with the recognition and popularity of the movie is obviously capitalizing on the movie,
967.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Yeah, I agree too. It's not prosecutable... But it is sue-able. So, to return to your original point: Did you have one?
968.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> What is the angle here? They tell people that it's Scarlett Johansson responding to them instead of a computer? To what end? I just don't get it. Then don't worry about it. It doesn't matter anyway. Ponder the quest
969.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Oh lovely, RIAA mingling in among the good guys... This may well be the only taint on Johansson's case.
970.
by CRConrad 2y ago
You seem to be missing the point: It wasn't that "people ... biased themselves into it"; it was the name, the ex-board-member's direct reference to Johansson, and Altman's tweet that did that.
971.
by CRConrad 2y ago
It's funny seeing some people immediately being convinced by this weak-sauce defense. Critical thinking might have saved you the embarrassment.
972.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Hey, the tape from Johansson herself will probably be in the top ten most popular choices! Maybe not top five, but at least top twenty, for sure! ;-)
973.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> I know that there are problems with each of those companies, but to hate all of them seems like a pattern to me Yeah, the pattern is that all these companies behave in ways so problematic that they generate hate. That shows the problem
974.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> @sama has done a good job at portraying himself as an elon/zuck hybrid visionary. Yeah, because those are such universally-beloved role models that modelling oneself on them is a genius move.
975.
by CRConrad 2y ago
That's assuming he wanted to avoid the furore. The opposite seems at least as plausible.
976.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> btw Karpathy doesn't really work for OpenAI anymore. You say that as if it would give him less credibility. In reality, it is of course the exact other way around.
977.
by CRConrad 2y ago
According to this cherry-picked article.
978.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> And so OpenAI can't legally... use any adult white female's voice in their product? No, they can't legally use an adult white female's voice that might be mistaken for Johansson's in their product and imply it
979.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> And in a world where there are deepfakes of every famous person.. People will finally stop trusting everything they see online. And in a world where there are deepfakes of every person, famous or not... People won't be able to t
980.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> Lord.. that's like the exact opposite of the world I want to live in. So the world you want to live in is a Neuromancer dystopia, check. > All to protect the rich bastards and entrenched interest. Yeah, because that's n
981.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> As long as it's clear it's not actually me and I'm not personally endorsing the product then what is the problem? At least the second time I've seen you making that argument on this page. So however long it was betw
982.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> My reaction would never be "we must make it so people can't do deepfakes anymore". That would cause people to stop using it for positive/benign things as well. Are there actually any "benign" uses for de
983.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Said #9 of those Chinese Tom Cruise clones... ;-) (No no, you're perfectly right [except perhaps about "the technology is great, and it will empower small creators"], but yagotta admit, your example in justaposition with your
984.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> It may be annoying that your customers care about things that you see as silly PR stuff, but it still matters to the business. Well it was the busines that engaged in the silly PR stuff in the first place, so... They knew it would ma
985.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Have read Bacigalupi’s The Water Knife [1], Tool of War [2], and The Tangled Lands [3]. Recommended! [1]: https://booko.us/w/7764514/The-Water-Knife_by_Paolo-Bacigalu... [2]: https://booko.us/w&
986.
by CRConrad 2y ago
> he pointed out how the AI demo OpenAI created is similar to the _character_ from Her. Are you a mind-reader, or how do you know that that was all he intended?
987.
by CRConrad 2y ago
So in that sense it's a good thing that "Open" AI are just as venal and stupid on small shit like this as on those bigger and more serious issues. So the great unwashed, with their limited attention spans (and, TBF, realist
988.
by CRConrad 2y ago
And who was the "her" the title referred to?
989.
by CRConrad 2y ago
But will either be mentioned by ChatGPT?
990.
by CRConrad 2y ago
Lots of people, apparently: One of the biggest threads I've seen on here in the last weeks (months?). So not a "nothingburger".

More ›