[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I know the model doesn't contain a copy of the training data, but it doesn't matter.

If the copyrighted data is downloaded at any point during training, that's an IP violation. Even if it is immediately deleted after being processed by the model.

As an analogy, if you illegally download a Disney movie, watch it, write a movie review, and then delete the file ... then you still violated copyright. The movie review doesn't contain the Disney movie and your computer no longer has a copy of the Disney movie. But at one point it did, and that's all that matters.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

It's not a matter of intelligence or sentience. The key question is whether the output of a prompt is fully predictable by the person who gave the prompt.

The behavior of a paintbrush, mouse, camera, or robot arm is predictable. The output of a prompt is not (at least, not predictable by the person who gave the prompt).

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

After her trial, maybe she will move in.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

One of the articles suggests that the device was removed because the batteries were no longer available and nearing end of life.

Regardless, a surgeon is only going to maintain devices approved by the FDA or cleared for investigational use. If the company goes bankrupt then both are no longer the case.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That's a public performance, which is a form of redistribution. That's not relevant to AI training.

Copyright law defines whether or not you can make a copy of a work. The person who owns the copyright can deny permission to make any copies, or grant you to make a permission to make a copy only under certain conditions. Those conditions are completely up to the copyright holder. They might prohibit public performance, but by no means is public performance the only thing that the copyright holder can prohibit. It's simply a very common prohibition.

You are trying to trying to generalize from a specific right, viewing the content on a browser, to a general right to "look" at the content, to the right to train an AI. But legally those are not the same at all. You may be granted some, all, or none of those rights.

Suppose you are in a modern art gallery. You have been given the right to "look" at someone's art. You can nevertheless be prohibited from making a photograph of the art, even if the camera is also "looking" at it. The owner of the art can attach whatever conditions they want to your photo, including how long you can keep it and exactly what you do with it.

For example you could be allowed to photograph the art for home use but not for wider distribution. You could be allowed to photograph the art for classroom use, but not for AI training. If you are not willing to follow all of the conditions, then you can't make a photo of the art at all.

The same is true of text. Websites give permission to make a copy of their text for use on your browser. And they can set whatever rules they like for how else your copy may be used.

Except for being banned from using public data that non-American AIs are able to use.

Sure. Of course, America could also ban those non-American AIs from being used in the US. Just as America bans other products that infringe patents/IP.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

In Greece, if you stop paying rent then can you keep living in your apartment rent-free? Or will you be forced to find another home?

If people who stop paying rent are forced to find a new home, then so should people who stop paying their mortgage.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Well, at least one alternative is war. Which I prefer to avoid, even if it requires a monopoly on violence.

And I will always prefer one group threatening violence to rule-breakers to multiple groups threatening violence to rule-breakers. Especially since multiple sets of rules are more likely to be contradictory.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

TINY EPIC DUNGEONS is a highly portable medium complexity cooperative fantasy dungeon crawler. Good for camping, but the RPG elements are more in the loot-and-level-up style than the epic narrative style.

ARKHAM HORROR LCG is a fairly portable light-medium complexity cooperative card game set in the Cthulhu mythos. There is a surprising amount of narrative for a card game, with some leveling-up between stories. And a seemingly neverending supply of story expansion decks.

FORGOTTEN WATERS is a full size light complexity cooperative boardgame with a pirate theme. I haven't played this one yet, but by all accounts it has a great story.

None of these games require significant preparation or a GM. Forgotten waters has an app, but I don't remember if it's required to play the game.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I don't see a reason to keep the bail system in place even for serious crimes. If a crime is serious enough to warrant pre-trial detention, then that person should be held regardless of their ability to pay bail.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Gerrymandering won't really affect a presidential election.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

No additional details about pausing operations, you say?

Huh.

The mystery deepens.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

FlowVoid

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago