In my personal (and therefore, limited) experience, engagement is much harder to get in the fediverse. I hope it improves, but it’s not easy to find people you don’t know in order to follow them, and vice versa.

In my lifetime we’ve gone from ‘there’s no water on Mars’ to ‘there’s tons of water all over the equator, evaporating into the atmosphere daily then freezing on the surface at night’. Which is pretty cool.

“What should we include when we build our humanoid robot?”

“It should stand up in the most unnerving way possible.”

Layoffs are always, always, always a sign of an unhealthy company, regardless of how Wall Steet reacts.

Hiring devs with degrees does not guarantee anything quality about the software they write.

It’s only not profitable because the CEO and CFO are taking such massive salaries, $193M and $93M, respectively.

They took $286M and the company lost $90M. They could take $90M less - still taking almost $200M - and Reddit would be profitable. That alone should tell investors that this is a bad investment.

I’m more interested in which filament was used.

It is worse, and Teams is even worse than Edge.

And, Amazon didn’t want to give up the ‘mapping everyone’s home and tracking them’ concept.

Maybe so, but there are people who aren’t scared of bears and get mauled to death. If he really is that dumb he won’t hear the impending doom.

1. Buy Brother, better printers without all this subscription garbage.

2. How long before an ‘open source’ printer hots the market and terrifies this idiot CEO?

I’m surprised not to see Yogi on the list.

He wore a tie, collar and a hat.

When Yogi said he was ‘smarter than the average bear’, everyone thought it was a joke, but he spoke English to humans, wore a hat and tie, and Ranger Smith complained that ‘keeping a secret from Yogi is like hiding Lake Michigan from a duck’.

So Yogi is smarter than the average bear, and it’s not even close.

Thanks for your response. I realize I muddied the waters on my question by mentioning exact copies.

My real question is based on the ‘everything is a remix’ idea. I can create a work ‘in the style of Banksy’ and sell it. The US copyright and trademark laws state that a work only has to be 10% differentiated from the original in order to be legal to use, so creating a piece of work that ‘looks like it could have been created by Banksy, but was not created by Banksy’ is legal.

So since most AI does not create exact copies, this is where I find the licensing argument possibly weak. I really haven’t seen AI like MidJourney creating exact replicas of works - but admittedly, I am not following every single piece of art created on Midjourney, or Stable Diffusion, or DALL-E, or any of the other platforms, and I’m not an expert in the trademarking laws to the extent I can answer these questions.

I think this is a difficult concept to tackle, but the main argument I see about using existing works as ‘training data’ is the idea that ‘everything is a remix’.

I, as a human, can paint an exact copy of a Picasso work or any other artist. This is not illegal and I have no need of a license to do this. I definitely don’t need a license to paint something ‘in the style of Picasso’, and I can definitely sell it with my own name on it.

But the question is, what about when a computer does the same thing? What is the difference? Speed? Scale? Anyone can view a picture of the Mona Lisa at any time and make their own painting of it. You can’t use the image of the Mona Lisa without accreditation and licensing, but what about a recreation of the Mona Lisa?

I’m not really arguing pro-AI here, although it may sound like it. I’ve just heard the ‘licensing’ argument many times and I’d really like to hear what the difference between a human copying and a computer copying are, if someone knows more about the law.

So, 95% chance that humans will cause human extinction.

And humans created AI, so even if AI does in the human race, it will still have been humans.

I guess if humans go extinct, it’s close to 100% due to humans.

Best part of the article:

“Goel’s scheme was uncovered in an in-depth investigation by reporter Allie Conti in 2019, who detangled the plot after being double-booked at one of his properties in Chicago and receiving a suspicious last-minute cancellation. Conti was contacted by the FBI days after the article was published.”

I wish there was more of this. Good investigative journalism has been one of the most powerful weapons in justice, and I fear it’s diminishing rapidly.

I imagine Kick.com might leverage this but who knows

I’ve seen the Joe Rogan and Dr. Phil ads mentioned in the article, as well as George Clooney, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Hanks and others. I’ve reported the ads multiple times.YouTube needs to squash this NOW instead of just pretending they aren’t aware of it.

If that were true, they would have had a better fiscal year in 2023. 2024 won’t be any better, because their management is not adapting, they are blaming others for their failures.

Nobody is suggesting that. The suggestion is that we stop automatically assuming someone believes something just because they are a certain age. We should judge people on their beliefs alone. If someone is a Boomer racist, they are a racist who happens to be a Boomer and never grew as a person. If someone is Gen Z and a racist, they are not racist because they are Gen Z, they are just racist.

I know people in Gen X who claim to not understand ‘anything about computers’ and I’m clueless how that happened. We had computers in the 70s and video games in the 80s. We were labeled the ‘slacker generation’ because of our Apple computers and video games, and somehow there’s a wide swath of people who just made the decision to be ignorant by choice of all of that. Are Gen X people just computer illiterate? They certainly shouldn’t be, so if they are, it’s by choice. If someone is a Boomer and a racist, it’s by choice, not by age. There will absolutely be people in Gen Z who turn 40 years old a in a couple of decades and claim not to understand something that they have right now.

I also know quite a few Boomers who are completely openly accepting of LBGQT people and every race. At the same time, I know a lot of young tech guys who are clearly misogynistic and racist, if not overtly. I judge them on their beliefs and if they are trying to evolve, not their age.