archontes

10 ms·

91.
by archontes 3y ago
You could always use an electromagnet.
92.
by archontes 3y ago
It's unlikely that model weights can be copyrighted, as they're the result of an automatic process.
93.
by archontes 3y ago
You don't own data. You can sometimes copyright data. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/science_technology/public...
94.
by archontes 3y ago
You don't own data. You can copyright data, maybe. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/science_technology/public...
95.
by archontes 3y ago
The only thing that's copying is a copy. Copyright has never ever covered style.
96.
by archontes 3y ago
More like, "Reading the internet".
97.
by archontes 3y ago
I don't think anyone has claimed that model weights are a production of AI and are not copyrightable for that reason. It's that the model weights are not the product of human effort. They're the result of an automatic process
98.
by archontes 3y ago
I'm using Firefox right now. When I highlight in the bar and press tab, ONLY when the drop-down bar is showing, it moves the cursor down one to Amazon, which is not my default search engine, but the first one alphabetically. So that do
99.
by archontes 3y ago
All I want is tab to search. Actual, identical-to-omnibar tab to search.
100.
by archontes 3y ago
Ikigai.
101.
by archontes 3y ago
I'm afraid that until the Chinese government stops their influence campaigns in foreign countries, Chinese nationals living elsewhere will be justifiably suspect. https://wisconsinwatch.org/2023/02/does-china-
102.
by archontes 3y ago
If you put your content on a billboard, what expectation should you have that you can control who reads it?
103.
by archontes 3y ago
Why are you posting this without context? We've all heard of it before, making us all practically experts.
104.
by archontes 3y ago
The policeman doesn't have to answer, and can literally lie to you.
105.
by archontes 3y ago
I would like to humbly submit that we should address the beam before the mote. https://i.imgur.com/UvyGJjq.jpeg
106.
by archontes 3y ago
I'm sure that copying a work for your private consumption would be considered non-commercial in nature, but his assertion that it doesn't affect the potential market for the item wouldn't hold up. It's clearly affecting
107.
by archontes 3y ago
Probably not, as the L.H.O.O.Q [1] is the literal textbook example of a derivative work, which would fall under the explicit protection of copyright. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.H.O.O.Q .
108.
by archontes 3y ago
US law as written does not permit this. Copyright restricts reproduction and the production of derivative work except for the reasons listed in fair use. Personal use isn't among those reasons (setting the US apart from like 20 other c
109.
by archontes 3y ago
Also, I believe this is irrelevant.
110.
by archontes 3y ago
A model being able to produce an infringing work doesn't mean the model is an infringing work. I can produce work myself that is infringing or not infringing as a result of learning.
111.
by archontes 3y ago
What's incredibly impressive is that that phrase doesn't appear anywhere else according to google. It's ChatGPT being genuinely 'creative'.
112.
by archontes 3y ago
That's not likely to be true. An AI can create a work that is infringing, a picture of a Marvel character, for example. But that doesn't make the AI or its weights or its training an infringement.
113.
by archontes 3y ago
I understand that. And with the comments it's almost certainly infringing. If you strip the comments out, though, it's questionable.
114.
by archontes 3y ago
The thing is that it probably isn't. The thing you call "laundering" is probably actually fine. The thing that people misunderstand is that copyright is written such that it never protects function. If your code is open sou
115.
by archontes 4y ago
Yeah, I'd be willing to wager Houston would be happy to snap up manufacturing and has plenty of skill in the talent pool. And proximity to Monterrey for cheap labor.
116.
by archontes 4y ago
It almost seems to me that the stakes are higher for other people. Microsoft can afford to have a go, fail, and just move on, whereas other people might have more on the line and try harder.
117.
by archontes 4y ago
A lot of creative thinking goes into the curation of the training set.
118.
by archontes 4y ago
I've got disappointing news for you. The copyright protecting your open source software never applied to its function, only its creative expression, and only insofar as the expression was separable from its function.
119.
by archontes 4y ago
Only if a human wrote it.
120.
by archontes 4y ago
It's almost certainly true that the collection of "all the good music from the 70s" is copyrightable as a collection, but that doesn't make the weights the result of a creative process.

More ›