freejazz

6 ms·

61.
by freejazz 2mo ago
So what should the law be? Don't be negligent? Don't be reckless? It already functions that way. Do we need to have statutes expressly dictating what people are allowed to do?
62.
by freejazz 2mo ago
They don't have to be solely responsible. What they are responsible for are their own actions.
63.
by freejazz 2mo ago
>Doesn’t Facebook invest a significant part to protect their brand by limiting and censoring content? Not really. >Last I checked Facebook didn’t have Rotten content on it. Instagram directly connects children with children predators.
64.
by freejazz 2mo ago
No, there's no need to. It has no bearing on the fact that Facebook facilitates child exploitation.
65.
by freejazz 2mo ago
>You're making a lot more assumptions on the inner workings of other people's minds than I am. Am I? It's not when its what they publish. Suddenly everyone at Anthropic isn't a believer when it came to their decision
66.
by freejazz 2mo ago
There was no judgment against them, it was a settlement and against only Anthropic. They asked their attorneys and they knew it was wrong. I have no sympathy for them. It's an insane kind of hubris to do what they did, thinking it woul
67.
by freejazz 2mo ago
You'd think they could've negotiated something better than $3k per work if they had actually gone to the table first.
68.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Well its not like copyright was invented last year...
69.
by freejazz 2mo ago
I'm not complaining
70.
by freejazz 2mo ago
If that's true, then why did they pirate so many books?
71.
by freejazz 2mo ago
> I doubt AI companies would use a single physical book if they could avoid it They just don't want to pay what the copyright holders want to charge
72.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Yeah and it's not great then either
73.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Yes, and? Lawsuits aren't automatic and you can't just say "don't like the result, redo!" in them either.
74.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Volokh Conspiracy is just culture war ragebait.
75.
by freejazz 2mo ago
The way to challenge a judge's opinion is to appeal it, not personally sue the judge. These responses are histrionic and misinformed.
76.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Crazy that posters here don't know the difference between a "fine," a "judgment," and a voluntary settlement. Anthropic didn't even train on the pirated libraries, they said. Still, they made copies. Probably t
77.
by freejazz 2mo ago
The point isn't that it's the underlying model, it's that it happened at all in the first place...
78.
by freejazz 2mo ago
They are saying that a search of the videos created by the cameras should require a warrant, which is different from saying that a warrant is required to record in public spaces
79.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Shame on anyone that works for Meta!
80.
by freejazz 2mo ago
I'm not ranking anything, I agreed with you. Does it seem stupid or something? I don't get your problem
81.
by freejazz 2mo ago
I genuinely don't understand how some people are allowed to post so much culture war slop all over this website
82.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Sure, let them earn all the money they want so long as they walk there?
83.
by freejazz 2mo ago
>See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49260422 Doesn't seem to be particularly well received nor does it respond to any of the obvious criticisms.
84.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Because it has to be a horrible job over there
85.
by freejazz 2mo ago
You can't patent something that is already published - and, again, if you are already researching whatever step 2, that is great evidence to invalidate the step 2 patent made by another company. So, again, your scenario is highly speci
86.
by freejazz 2mo ago
>Usually it's to defend against another company using a "blocking patent" by pursuing you for infringing their patent which is built upon the thing you patented, doing the next step which was always obvious to you. Would b
87.
by freejazz 2mo ago
> Yeah you're right, I was thinking of trademarks. I just think the system is very cumbersome and antiquated It's always something like this, from someone who didn't even realize they weren't actually talking about pa
88.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Are you saying Mistral didn't invest a lot of money in discovering the invention this patent covers? I'd bet they'd say otherwise. How is the patent office supposed to tell the difference? I don't think a "pay-to-pl
89.
by freejazz 2mo ago
Sure, why not make it more difficult, then?
90.
by freejazz 2mo ago
"Fair use" is not a defense in patent law

More ›