Peacepath

Copyright is a deprivation of freedom, and the GPL comes using this rules to turn around them. I won’t defend copyright. AI comes with more important problems, such as ecology, and creating monster private companies that have far too much power.

The tool in itself can really be usefull when well used. Many people use it and get nice results. Many people abuse it, and many people abuse themselves with it. It is true with a hammer too. I don’t think “hammer-free” is a feature, even if their are many domain in which I don’t see the point of using a hammer (and so “made with a hammer” isn’t a feature either).

Also, I can’t find any example in history of a technology that was successfully banned despite being usefull. Some have been regulated, such as nuclear industries, but that was not perfect and needed a continuous and hard strugle. The strict “no-AI” movement has already lost its battle, at most we could get regulations, maybe…

I hope he doesn’t read, but he could make every living humans on earth have a bit of America deep inside them, and be far more intimate to your nation, by just renaming the assholes.

Just a quick meaningless poll, which of you feel like their gouvernment is clearly less dumb and hallucinating than AI? (and where is this great land of yours?)

Most of those who have one don’t plan to have an other one? Ok, but is that supposed to be weird?

They are the powerful people, and they know why they don’t want to be kept accountable.

My guess is we will see some less convenient models, that gives better result but a “weird” way ; and far more very convenient models, easy to use, but that generate advertisings as a result (maybe even with promo codes!)…

Remember how internet search have evolved, how youtube has became, how everything went when finance guys decided it was time for harvest…

Now look at this new field, see how they grow it… what are the odds their plan is to harvest it at some point?

We are not yet at the point LLM are so dependent on advertising and “partnerships” that they are totally biased in favor of specific brands… not yet…

Take a time to anticipate how the actual state will soon be regreted…

In my understanding, and being myself among the “not manly enough”, the one like us grow mostly in two kinds: those who mask masculinity well enough, and those who don’t.

Yet all those who mask it are affraid of us because they could fail their masking around us. And they hate us because we found a way to make it without spending a lot of energy in masking. It is not something they know nor do willingly.

I have tried to mask, instinctively, and because society was waiting it from me. You probably tried too. It is far from easy and a constant pointless effort. It was rejecting our real self while seeking to make ourself accepted… And I think putting it like this makes obvious that those who success at masking need to reject us to keep up their mask: if they begin to accept us, it would be too difficult for them to reject their real selves hard enough.

Also, you may recognize genuinely masculine men at the fact they aren’t scared by feminine men nor gay men around them.

Oh yes we are young! And since no less than 40 years! ^^

For sugar, it seems to be more effective than cocain if you want to make some food addictive…

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0000698

It is fun for me… I am a crazy fool developper and most real software professionals tell me I am dumb to think that a mistake should lead to something else than an error that kills the program (and wait for user’s restart).

So, yes, I agree with you, out it won’t happen as long as makers trust deprivating software makers (those who make softwares no one else may modify).

Imagine if you could make it watch advertising for your earnings… But yes, it would need the softwares belong to you, rather than to the washing machine’s maker…

Why not rename tap water to “gazoline”?

Economical books of Lenin may also be of interest, Henri Ford studied them while he never was a communist. It is a bit harder to read than the manifesto of Marx and Engels, but it doesn’t require to be an economist.

I would love to find good ideas for protecting digital freedom, and freedom in general. May we can assume that those who do not care about privacy aren’t using Lemmy… But I don’t know how to protect ours except by defending it as a principle that should be universal.

And so a rule to restrict freedom except for us is not a good news to me. It is not as bad as if we were concerned directly, but it is still a step backward. Isn’t it?

At some point they may need a new target, and we could be one. We are known by the general public while we are neither too much nor too powerful. And nobody would defend us beside those already targeted.

I know it is not the aim, I am concerned by how it may be used against free softwares… once more, I hope I am wrong.

Also, I am concerned by the loss of freedom involved by this policy. And I don’t think it is made to protect any one, just to restrict and control.

USA murdered anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti far before they became a significant threat to the system. What ever tries to bring freedom is so scared by american authorities… But once more, hopefully you are right and I am just overly pessimistic.

I hope you are right.

Yet do you know if the thing implemented by California would allow criminals to make sure that a kid is really a kid before they attack? Because if that is the case, and even if it needs a hack to do so, it may do the opposit of its aim.

So if you want to protect your kids from adult rated content, and you live in California, you need to buy a propietary system. Which make sure data collectors get to know all about them, and therefore doesn’t protect them… But am I the only one to see the commercial argument about to be used by MS, Apple, and others?