freejazz

27 ms·

631.
by freejazz 1y ago
> Because the onus is on you to show the substantive difference It literally is not. If the defense for your copyright infringement is "my machine is actually the same as a human" then it's your obligation to substantiate
632.
by freejazz 1y ago
Lol it's willful infringement which at law entitles them up to $150,000. Calling it "bloodlust" is just so ridiculous as to render you without any actual credibility in this conversation.
633.
by freejazz 1y ago
This headline is incorrect.
634.
by freejazz 1y ago
I still don't understand what a "reasoning" LLM is
635.
by freejazz 1y ago
That doesn't support the conclusion that facebook could, stop beating your dead horse.
636.
by freejazz 1y ago
Hasn't seemed to stop the rich at all
637.
by freejazz 1y ago
Well, I'm pretty sure every state in the US disagrees with you and I'm not going to be continuing this conversation any further given that you think it's fine for adults to solicit sex from minors so long as "actions&quo
638.
by freejazz 1y ago
> And I don't think kids seeing porn is particularly harmful. That's not what is happening on Facebook and there is no way I could believe you genuinely think that's what everyone is talking about. Did you even read the ar
639.
by freejazz 1y ago
> It wasn't a big deal You seem unsocialized, for what it's worth. Probably still not something TV or video games would fix.
640.
by freejazz 1y ago
Yawn. Is this supposed to be charming? Principled? I don't get your shtick. People act like it's politics but it really comes off more as just being foremost disagreable and unreasonable. Jumping into a conversation about pedophil
641.
by freejazz 1y ago
Do you think the sexual solicitation of minors should not be illegal? Whether or not it's the parent's responsibility to protect their own children is besides the point. It can also be true that others facilitate and turn a blind
642.
by freejazz 1y ago
1. That presupposes the problem is bad faith referrals or that pedos aren't sufficiently aware they can get popped on FB. I don't think either are likely true. 2. I don't think the scalability issues are related to the size o
643.
by freejazz 1y ago
>Sorry, but from my point of view, they serve pedos to police on a silver platter. If the police don't take action, that's not Facebook's fault. That's a bit of a strawman. I've never seen it suggested that the p
644.
by freejazz 1y ago
Are you saying that the sexual predation of minors is not objectively harmful to them? Are you aware that the sexual solicitation of a minor is a crime?
645.
by freejazz 1y ago
Amazon actually delivers things. Facebook still has a pedo problem, so no, I don't think you're right and it's certainly not even a good example to make your point with anyway as there is no similarity at all. It's pre
646.
by freejazz 1y ago
Says more about you than anything else. They have completely different business models, so I don't get the shock, let alone the relation. Facebook can't scale if they have to have human moderation at an amount that would actually
647.
by freejazz 1y ago
New season of The Rehearsal?
648.
by freejazz 1y ago
>Harm is subjective and I'd much rather parents make that call than the government. Is that what Meta's research indicated?
649.
by freejazz 1y ago
They stated it in court in their papers for summary judgment on the issue of fair use. My gosh! To pretend like you know what you're talking about but missing that detail?
650.
by freejazz 1y ago
Is the issue that meta didn't "release" the research or that they didn't do anything about the findings and told workers to ignore it?
651.
by freejazz 1y ago
e) is probably not effectively scalable, like the rest of Meta's products which are oases for pedos
652.
by freejazz 1y ago
> unfair monopolistic advantages for no particular reason Is that true?
653.
by freejazz 1y ago
I'm not sure how your confusion about what's going on is being projected to me. What about "also" what about "adjacent"? >In my experience&training in a fintech corp- Accepting a settlement in any suit w
654.
by freejazz 1y ago
That's not even remotely true. Page 4 of the settlement describes released claims which only relate to the pirating of books. Again, the amount of misinformation and misunderstanding I see in copyright related threads here ASTOUNDS.
655.
by freejazz 1y ago
Well it's willful infringement so a court would be entitled to add a punitive multiplier anyway. But this is something Anthropic agreed to, if that wasn't clear.
656.
by freejazz 1y ago
It just resolves their liability with regards to books they purported they did not even train the models on, which is all that was left in this case after summary judgment. Sure the potential liability was company ending, but it's all
657.
by freejazz 1y ago
They wanted to move fast and break things. No one made them.
658.
by freejazz 1y ago
It's obviously not rooted in Arab culture at all. I can imagine this being confusing to someone whose experience with Arabic culture consists entirely of having seen Aladdin, however.
659.
by freejazz 1y ago
I don't use AI.
660.
by freejazz 1y ago
Thank you!

More ›