Several timeline rating agencies have rated this timeline in the bottom quartile.

I’m starting to think an article referring to LLM as AI is s red flag, while them referring to them as LLM is a green flag.

First of all, copying or modifying somebody else’s work without their permission isn’t theft. Information cannot be owned in the way a physical object can be, as access to information is nonexclusive, meaning any number of people can use the same piece of information without impeding each other. Contrast that with physical objects, say a car. If I’m using your car, you can’t use it, because I’m doing so. If I copy your book, you still have the original. Hence its not theft.

Copyright is a legal privilege governments grant to artists, so that the artists can be paid for their work. (In practice, it mostly protects big publishers and a few wealthy artists. Most artists can’t afford to the legal battle necessary to get the state to actually enforce the legal privilege they’ve been granted).

This is a weird thread. Lots of people for artists losing control of their creations quickly while simultaneously against artist creations being used by others without consent.

You are conflating copyright infringement and plagiarism. Plagiarism is claiming that you created the works of somebody else. This is morally wrong, regardless of whether you have the consent of the original author. By claiming that you created something you didn’t, you are lying to your audience. (In fact, even disguising your earlier work as new is considered plagiarism). The plagiarist is not a thief, they’re a liar. When you put somebody’s work into an LLM, and claim you created the output, you have committed plagiarism. Unless you credit every work used in the training of said LLM.

when I publish a book, to steal it is consenting to be Luigi’d; no matter how long ago it came out.

You do know that Luigi Mangione plead not guilty to the charges? And yet you use his name as a euphemism for murder. You can’t own information, copying it is not stealing.

To be fair, there’s about a fifty-fifty chance that a subreddit, or lemmy community for that matter, called “supressed news” is going to be filled loonies, and those guys could spend all day masturbating to the though of violently dismantling the power of the World Economic Forum.

Well, meowmeowbeanz has a good point, namely, Anonymous saying anything is meaningless. Because Anonymous is a not a group, at best it could be called a movement, at worst it’s just a name. In any case, anybody can claim to speak for them. Hence their statements are meaningless.

However, meowmeowbeanz’s post is also a barely coherent rant with overused emphasis. Which makes them seem mentally unwell. It’s like encountering somebody with a tinfoil hat ranting about how the earth is round.

Yeah. Germany for example. If it weren’t for the mercy of the victors, and the massive development aid Germany received under the Marshal plan, then Germany would be much poorer today. You just need to compare the territory for the former DDR to the rest of Germany to get an idea.

Adding another recommendation: Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup

That .gif is a classic.

In addition to what frazorth said, you can change how a statement is interpreted by simply using a passive voice. Compare “Alice was hit by Bob” to “Bob hit Alice”. Both statements are identical, but the former is a lot less accusatory towards Bob. This technique is used when reporting about Police abuse, or about how the civilians in Gaza are treated.

You can’t just throw out random Wikipedia links. For example, the Article on AGI explicitly says we don’t have a definition of what human level cognition actually is. Which is what the person you were replying to was saying. You’re doing a fallacious appeal to authority, except that the authority doesn’t agree with you.

Protip: Set yourself up with an offside server before turning on your creators.

Idea: Governments maintain a list of entities that are evading the law like that, and then doesn’t prosecute people who are accused of crimes against such entities. The idea being that if you place yourself outside of the law’s reach, you also place yourself outside of the law’s protection.

4 hours in, can still read it. Agree with your assessment, too.

It’s sort of a strange approach, because this will leave you with the workers who can’t find employment elsewhere.

A lot of them are using old, pre-AI tactics, too, going by the image.

So, what do you not like about the Freetube’s UI and UX?

So you’re a sadist, but you try to convince yourself it’s okay because you only want to torture people you think deserve it. Of course, no one deserves to be tortured.

Yeah, it does. Perfect opsec is impossible even with encryption.

That said, it’s misleading and inaccurate to state that neural networks are just statistics. In fact they are substantially more than just advanced statistics. Certainly statistics is a component—but so too is probability, calculus, network/graph theory, linear algebra, not to mention computer science to program, tune, and train and infer them. Information theory (hello, entropy) plays a part sometimes.

What I meant when I said that they are advanced statistics is that that is what they do. I know that a lot of disciplines play a part in creating them. I know it’s incredible complicated, it took me quite a while to wrap my head around what the back-propagation algorithm.

I also know that neural networks can do some really cool stuff. Recognizing tumors, for example. But it’s equally dangerous to overestimate them, so we have to be aware of their limitations.

Edit: All that being said, I do recognize that you have spent much more time learning about and working with neural networks than I have.

The thing with AI is, what the term today refers to most often is neural networks, which are really advanced statistics. And the thing is, to get more precise statistics, you need exponentially more data. And of course the marginal utility decays exponentially. So exponentially increasing marginal expenses meet exponentially decaying marginal utility.