freejazz

12 ms·

271.
by freejazz 6mo ago
It does settle the law in as far as maintaining the status quo.
272.
by freejazz 6mo ago
Not if claude does the writing. MS doesn't write things for you, and if it did, you would not be entitled to a copyright in whatever it wrote for you.
273.
by freejazz 6mo ago
You're in denial and this is cope. The tools aren't even close. The notion that any model is 5% away from doing what has been promised *FOR YEARS* is just facially ridiculous. >Then it might be already too late to act like usin
274.
by freejazz 6mo ago
Yeah and every year before there was another poster telling me the next model iteration would be enough.
275.
by freejazz 6mo ago
Maybe ask your LLM what a litigator is, as it is not any of what you described as (not) involving your attorney in.
276.
by freejazz 6mo ago
"In the long run" is doing a tremendous amount of work for your response.
277.
by freejazz 6mo ago
I don't particularly care about coding and didn't weigh in on it. There is no dispute that people debate if it is effective at that. You can take that debate up with them, not me.
278.
by freejazz 6mo ago
> Self-driving had never the amount of compute, research adoption and money than what the current overall AI has. And yet they don't do really good jobs with pretty much anything, save for software development, to which people still
279.
by freejazz 6mo ago
These models need orders of magnitude in change before they can be more helpful than just a "find me an example of [an extremely basic principle]" which most of the time it does not do right anyway.
280.
by freejazz 6mo ago
> Ilya Sutskever genuinely believed it Seems more like an incredibly embarrassing belief on his part than something I should be crediting.
281.
by freejazz 6mo ago
And I've been told my job (litigation attorney) is about to be replaced for over 3 years now, has yet to come close.
282.
by freejazz 6mo ago
Marketing
283.
by freejazz 6mo ago
Impossible to take any of this seriously when it constantly refers to AGI.
284.
by freejazz 6mo ago
>The arrogance displayed here is astounding. Projecting much?
285.
by freejazz 6mo ago
The thought that Meta has in any way benefitted society is objectively insane.
286.
by freejazz 6mo ago
The ignorance on this website is both astonishing and incredibly obnoxious
287.
by freejazz 6mo ago
Sure (let's disagree)
288.
by freejazz 6mo ago
FSD (not)
289.
by freejazz 6mo ago
No, because in the circumstance of an attorney doing it, it is an attorney doing it.
290.
by freejazz 6mo ago
>At least I have never seen anyone argue in NY that privilege is waived by emailing. It was a frequent issue when email first was a thing
291.
by freejazz 6mo ago
And they are free to make the tickets non-transferrable. The Cure did that. Last Phish MSG run the tickets were non-transferrable and I had to use CashorTrade to trade my tickets.
292.
by freejazz 6mo ago
The tickets are all electronic now and they can already do it. Most artists don't want them to.
293.
by freejazz 7mo ago
I agree, but I'm not sure the person I'm responding to would. I cannot imagine how anyone could describe today's internet as healthy.
294.
by freejazz 7mo ago
What about the internet today is healthy such that anyone could point to Section 230 as the reason why?
295.
by freejazz 7mo ago
It's not sneering. Anthropic constantly puts itself out as some sort of moral arbiter when they are no different from any other business, as your quote suggests.
296.
by freejazz 7mo ago
Those are?
297.
by freejazz 7mo ago
Yeah, and that's why they got of rid of their commitment to safety so they can stay cutting edge?
298.
by freejazz 7mo ago
Okay? They're exactly the assholes everyone says they are. That's the point.
299.
by freejazz 7mo ago
>For example it sure seems like his mountain of circumstantial evidence fits better with the theory that “Satoshi” could be a pen name for a small group of people—maybe even the small group whose history he traces and whose styles he has
300.
by freejazz 7mo ago
Did you read most of the article or what?

More ›