Snaps do not have someone responsible for them. The package maintainers of Debian packages are developers trusted by the project. In snap and flathub each software has its own uploader who isn't vetted by anyone.
Package maintainers follow the development of the programs they are packaging and notice if something is fishy. How often did Debian package a malicious software?
The problem is, that Ubuntu tries to establish an Appstore instead of using a package repository and now they get the problems that Appstores have.
Most the time your phone will be turned on and then Apple can install updates anyway.
But for the binaries I got under GPL, I can still ask for the source. Even ten years later. It doesn't matter if later versions weren't GPLed anymore.
Yes. But it doesn't say it has to be distributed the same was as the binary as long as you get the source in a reasonable way. So they may, for example, e-mail you a zip with the source if you ask for it. They don't need to host it as long as there is a way to request it.
You still need to give people who already got the binary the corresponding source.
Google advanced AI quite a lot. What's bad about doing do? They both saw a trend and they helped progress. Now they are in a good position. What's the problem with that?
And I don't understand Microsoft either. While Google has good hardware and good models for, e.g., image recognition, it's generative AI are failures. Gemini sucks while MS does have a good partnership with OpenAI who create GenAI that actually work. Yeah, ChatGPT is getting worse (probably because they are optimizing costs), but Gemini isn't quite usable at all.
If you don't know, why does it matter how the artist you like to pay creates its art?
It won't get ready without distributions shipping it. How are you supposed to find bugs without having users?
Have a look at the KDE folks. They had to ship a completely broken 4.0 to get developers to fix their things to work with the cleaned up architecture. It got usable around 4.2, but many Linux distributions shipped 4.0, so they got their feedback. Now, plasma 6 is greater than ever, still building upon the cleanup that happened between 3.x and 4.0.
Apple is working toward this on the desktop. Try to run unsigned software on macOS. They make it more and more complicated. If nobody forbids it, you won't be able to run software that wasn't signed by apple on your mac in ten years.
StackOverflow had committed itself to give back cc licensed DB dumps. They stop providing them some time ago, justifying it with LLM training when asked and re-enabled them after they got a bit of a shitstorm for no longer giving back to the community. The site content itself is cc-licensed anyway.
This means, that if they continue to provide the dumps, people could just train on the dumps. If they do not continue, people can legally (given that attribution is provided) crawl the site itself.
And finally, one should think that one of the points in "giving back to the community" would be allowing the users to train LLM on their (own) data. The whole deal with that was users saying "We accept SO being a silo as long as the silo regularity provides us dumps of the data".
> Was it instructed to "add diversity" (probably not done using english phrases), or was it instructed to use real world demographics rather than assumes western Europeans are the statistical norm?
Actually neither. The tests people made show that it is more direct and terms like "black" "asian" and other nationalities were randomly inserted into the prompts. In the end it does the same as Dall-E (https://twitter.com/rzhang88/status/1549472829304741888), but when multiple people are in a scene it seems to target multiple areas of the image with different prompts.
As it uses a LLM it is possible that the actual LLM prompt was "Insert one of the following words:
The image AI works well. It's the LLM instructed to add diversity that runs amok.
1) Make sure never to agree to a contract regarding the model. Don't use the hugginface version that requires you to agree to conditions. You may be bound to them otherwise even when you don't need a license for the weights.
2) The weights itself can't be copyrighted, so you can use them without a license. Without a license you aren't bound to what they write in the license.
Source for the claim that there can't be copyright on weights:
https://old.reddit.com/r/Local...
TL;DR reason why there is no copyright: Copyright implies creative work of a human. Running gradient descent on a large dataset is fully automated and does not qualify as the work of a human.
> The Chrome operating system will ultimately allow users to keep using their Windows 10 systems
That's just wrong. They can keep using the computer, but not Windows 10. ChromeOS is Linux-based.
"Show business is just like high school, except you get paid." - Martin Mull
