I don't think training a model with copyrighted data is any kind of gray zone at all.

Running inference against such a model _might_ be infringing.

But I don't see the legal argument that model training would be.

Think of model training as lossy data compression. You provide an input, it produces a compressed artifact, and it can no longer reproduce the original when you uncompress it. It can produce _something_. It cannot reproduce the original.

On slashdot, we all agree that format shifting copyrighted works should be allowed and unrestricted, right?

If there is applicable case law here about how lossy a "reproduction" can be before copyright has something to say about it, that would be relevant. Do you know of any?

I think you're repeating something that feels emotionally valid but in my experience, isn't factually (or legally) accurate.

I have found AI models to be frustratingly _obedient_ of copyright.

I'll be in a situation where I ask a specific question about what a document says, and the AI repeatedly says the work is copyrighted and it can't just tell me what it says _verbatim_, but it can answer specific questions for me in its own words (while telling me to check the original).

Two examples from my life are procedural questions about what Roberts Rules of Order would require in a given situation, and, what ASD STE-100 says about how to name/word things.

The applicable US law would appear to be USC 17 Sec 106 and 107, which on one hand limits derivative works, but on the other, allows fair use for purposes of teaching, scholarship, or research.

(USC references provided by AI, btw. Which I haven't read)

I used to agree with you, and then oddly enough, about 25-30 years ago, I came across this signature on another regular slashdot posters postings:

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

(AI tells me the attribution is "The Red Lily", Anatole France, 1894)

Not true. Islam forbids the consumption of pork as food and the use of other pig products, such as pigskin, but allows the use of pig organs to save a life if there is no alternative. Jews too may receive pig organs as transplants since Jewish law explicitly permits any commandment other than the ones against murder, idolatry, and forbidden sexual relations (adultery, incest, etc.) to be broken in order to save a life.

The user agreement itself doesn't mention fines but the Rulebook does. However, on my cursory reading, it only allows Kalshi to collect fines from the user's account with them. It doesn't seem to allow them to collect in other ways.

No, according to the post they are going to auction off the data they have stolen if the ransom is not paid.

I understand how the CFTC can impose fines, but how can Kalshi, which is not a government agency? Are users contractually bound to accept such fines?

Automated alarm calls are apparently another issue. I haven't seen good statistics on what percentage of 911 calls are alarm calls, but it seems that they are at least 10% and that the percentage is rising. Over 95% of automated alarm calls are reportedly false alarms.

Some calls are repeats, either different people calling about the same event or the same person calling when he or she doesn't get through. 911 also gets automated calls from alarms, some of which are false alarms. That's why, of the 1700 calls that could not be heard, they estimate that about 400 represent human callers who did not get through.

How hard would it be to replace the software on these devices?

This sounds attractive but what I've seen on their site and reviews is not very clear on how good it is as a phone. I don't care about most cell phone apps. I either don't need the functionality or I do it on my Linux laptop. I want a voice phone on which I can text, take photos, and run a browser. That's about it. The option attaching a keyboard is attractive as I find typical virtual keyboards very slow and error prone. So, how well does it work as a telephone? Is it limited in which services it is compatible with?

Remote places here in Northern British Columbia, reached by logging roads. There are now chargers along some remote provincial highways (e.g. highway 20), but I have yet to see one on a logging road. Some of the places I drive, there isn't even a gas station. You have to carry a lot of gas yourself.

It's much less likely to crash than other software, and nobody will try to forcibly update it.

If you talk to your car about deep stuff, you should probably consider a visit to a psychiatrist. :)