trevor

Where do you get the nightly builds?

The desktop app can be used as a bridge for biometrics in the browser extension, but other than that, it basically serves no unique purpose unless and until they add autofill for desktop applications.

Totally fair. I'm curious to see if anyone else may have reasons why it might be suboptimal.

Is the a downside to repacking the deb package? They're basically just zip files of the same binary you'd run on most other Linux distros.

The problem isn't isn't solved by Biden or Harris being "strong" on the border, because it is the wrong problem.

The real problem is that democrats have accepted the right-wing framing on immigration, by laundering the far-right narrative that there is a border crisis and putting forward a far-right immigration bill that would give the president unilateral power to shut down the border.

Them capitulating to this narrative lends validity to patently racist propaganda, like we're seeing with Haitian migrants and the "Venezuelan gangs" story.

Aside from the fact that demonizing minority groups being a morally disgusting thing to do, it's really stupid political strategy for the democrats. Voters that are preoccupied with brown people coming into the country will vote overwhelmingly for Repugs every single time. Democrats will not be able to win over those ~~people~~ racists by trying to out-righting the Republicans.

The problem isn't the democracy bit. It's the enabling racism and genocide, being spineless, and blind trust in institutions and civility bit that could cost them the election.

Best we can do is laundering the far-right narrative that there is a crisis at the border and advocating for the far-right border bill that Republicans want.

Yeah. It's scary to see how many freaks can be convinced otherwise are all over the place.

Thanks for sharing the actual license text.

To me, this stinks of companies knowing that if they're actually required to reproduce the data, they'll get hit with copyright infringement or other IP-related litigation. Whereas if they can just be trusted to very honestly list their sources, they can omit the sources they weren't authorized to steal and reproduce content from, they can get away with it.

I think that, in practice, this means that the industry standard will be to lie and omit the incriminating data sources, and when someone tries to reproduce the model they won't actually be able to, but they also won't be able to easily prove one way or another if data was withheld.

Really, what should (but won't) happen, is that we should fix our broken IP laws and companies should be held to account for when they engage in behavior that would be prosecuted as piracy or Computer Fraud and Abuse if you or I did it.

AI is pretty much the epitome of companies getting to act with impunity in the eyes of the law and exerting that power over everyone else, and it's annoying to see it get a blessing from an "open source" organization.

“The new definition requires Open Source models to provide enough information about their training data so that a ‘skilled person can recreate a substantially equivalent system using the same or similar data,’ which goes further than what many proprietary or ostensibly Open Source models do today,” said Ayah Bdeir, who leads AI strategy at Mozilla.

Garbage. What this says to me is that they're going to allow companies that create models that were trained on data that would be illegal for you and me to scrape and regurgigate, to keep the data to themselves as long as they "provide enough information" for someone else that lacks the resources or legal impunity that companies have to theoretically re-steal the data. Which, you know, means that the models won't be reproducible by any reasonable standard, and can't actually be called open source.

But the OSI is just a handful of companies in a trenchcoat, so I'm not surprised by what they would call "open".

Dropsite News consists of former The Intercept journalists and they do really good work.

Also, anything that Mehdi Hasan does.

I'm on mobile, but I stand by what I said. Responding to someone that was responding to someone else that was being obstinate with average response when I ask for help is missing the actual point.

The OP that I quoted wanted to be combative, got a combative response, and then ~~someone else~~ you made it about "asking for help", which is ~~their~~ your fault if ~~they~~ you think that this thread had anything to do with it.