Shit, I feel old remembering accidentally stumbling upon Goatse back in the dayt.

Last I checked the issue was about returning to the office; that doesn't automatically make it about "having to work" (work from home is working, and people slacking off doesn't translate into "nobody works when remote). Not to mention that it isn't "whining" or "bitching" to express displeasure *in of itself*.

I can see why you posted this comment as anon, given how jackassedly presumptuous it is.

Methinks he may need a boot to the head! XD

I think I need sleep ... or a new prescription for my glasses. I misread that as "dildo browser." Tell me I'm not the only one.

IMO hyper-focusing on copyright *status* this way doesn't make sense. If a work is created anywhere where copyright is automatic, it';s copyrighted regardless of the licensing or lack thereof. If we focus on making "using copyrighted works" itself wrong OR illegal (OR both) you'd kill off the ability to use works where the creators either gave explicit permission, or implicit permission through use of the appropriate Creative Commons license for instance, to use for training, which doesn't make sense to me.


TL;DR: Don't focus on copyright status alone, IMO focusing on licensing or lack thereof AND / OR whether licensing is needed for training makes more sense.

I wonder, is it just doing "a new thing?" Can it also be new variations of things, combinations of new things and old things, combinations of old things and new ways ot do old things, etc,, that will alter that perception of how fast or slow time is passing?

(Does my ponderance even make sense?)

Definitely tricky - current "AI detection" is IMO inconsistent-to-dogshit in terms of accuracy, then there is issue of counter-measures being useds to train smarter systems that try to beat them.

Emphasizing "FREE" in all caps IMO doesn't do anything to address the points raised.

Citation needed? (Not being used by one proces =/= idle, the OS utilizing memory and other processes, you know, running are things). I question how many repeating this crap even sat through a computer operating system design class.

To be fair, it'd be an allegation of infringement if they go that route - am I misunderstanding it though in thinking it's more like YT is talking about a breach of contract angle?

Or, it should take when it needs it, and not force the OS to clean up after avoidable sloppines wherever it may be present in a user level application.

Maybe if they had more trust - irrespective of if the distrust being expressed is completely justified or not - they wouldn't feel the need. Either way, more options IMO is good.

Or... how about those being potential options AND allowing people to have granular control over how a program behaves with the rest of the system?

Irrespective of anything else, I definitely wanna install Torotise + RVC now to experiment with - hopefully my stupid ass can figure it out.

The "as closed as possible" bit, ngl, always bothered me (since I believe tech like this should be open, moreso knowing the foundation here is essentially built on OSS). I wonder, perhaps a stupid question, does this mean that if someone really, REALLY wanted to, they could (with relative ease) start up their own 15ai type deal, with most of the same things that made it attractive in the first place?