The video is 15 minutes long and at the four-second mark flashes a screenshot from Zoolander, in which the protagonist unveils the “Center for Kids Who Can’t Read Good.”
It also features a punchy techno backing track while wasting the reviewer’s time with approximately 14 minutes of inactivity.
Believe it or not, getting votes is also part of their job. It’s an integral part of the system and usually works if they actually try to represent us.
Imagine complaining about the plumber who tried to fix your leaky pipe with a paper napkin, and have someone saying you are scapegoating them. It’s their fucking job to prevent this.
I would donate all my savings towards a movie/documentary of Jesse Eisenberg sitting at home alone and just living his life and entertaining himself with his drab hobbies, just so he is too busy to do any actual movies.
Literally anybody else, please
The outputs are still bound to copyright laws. Tracing pixel per pixel over an artwork doesn’t make it immune to copyright laws, maliciously over training gen ai to act like a database and outright copy shouldn’t either.
If you have a carbon copy of someone’s github, it doesn’t matter if you generated it, it’s still a copy. Although code is a difficult example since I’m not entirely where the line is for one repo to be different then the other when they are accomplishing the same task.
I always imagined businesses just grabbed the gpl software and would tell their employees to rewrite it but different. Most things I dive down into seem to stem from one algorithm or two from a paper and the rest is fluff.
In such a scenario, it will be worth it. Llm aren’t databases that just hold copy pasted information. If we get to a point where it can spit out whole functional githubs replicating complex software, it will be able to do so with most software regardless of being trained on similar data or not.
All software will be a prompt away including the closed sourced ones. I don’t think you can get more open source then that. But that’s only if strident laws aren’t put in place to ban open source ai models, since Google will put that one prompt behind a paychecks worth of money if they can.
I’m not sure how that applies in the current context, where it would be used as training data.
The dismantling goes into overdrive if they send all the juges who can stop it on vacation. I really want them to shut it down but I don’t think it would help.
My dogs face when I’m holding bacon is how I imagine Republicans look when they see a boot.
Why aren’t the tarifs working, is fox news lying to me?
If it costs billions and billions, then only a handful of companies can afford to build an AI and they now have a monopoly on a technology that will eventually replace a chunk of the workforce. It would basically be giving our economy to Google.
If copyrights are used to add a huge price tag to any AI development, then it did just hamper innovation and technological development.
And sadly, what most are clamoring for will disproportionately affect open source development.
The goverment will kill Anna’s archive the moment laws stemming from this lawsuits are passed. It guarantees any new open source initiatives don’t surface once they are all shut down. The big players will be okay though since they can stomach the fines and pay for the data.
The best would be to have recorded audio that slowly goes down in volume, with the tone at full blast at the end