The Guardian says ‘I have never seen such open corruption’: Trump’s crypto deals and loosening of rules shock observers. The article is worth reading and highly concerning.

The difference is that going to the next LTS release rarely involves having to go get a new computer to meet some new requirement and doesn't tend to completely change something in your workflow. If you go with something like BTRFS, you can even easily roll the whole thing back if the results aren't good enough.

Also, you never wake up one morning and find that the system has updated itself to a new release without even asking.

Given the way so many people vastly over-estimate ChatGPT as an actual intelligence, I thing it's quite fair to put it up against an old and tiny chess engine on easy level. This is basically "Are you Smarter than a5th Grader" for AIs. And it is NOT.

AIUI, your costs can't (or couldn't) generally be passed on when using the small claims system. Has that changed? It's been a while since I went through the process, so it's possible that my information here is out of date.

There is obviously a personal data angle here. There might also be a defamation angle if the system works as implied by TFS, since it appears that someone's reputation has been affected because someone else lied about them and this has demonstrably caused harm? If there was more than one relevant incident then there might also be a harassment angle.

Please be careful with that advice about requesting compensation in a Letter Before Action, though. There are fairly specific rules for what you can and can't claim under our system and just going in with claiming some arbitrary figure of a few thousand pounds in "compensation" for vague damages is far from guaranteed to get the result you're hoping for. If someone were serious about challenging this kind of behaviour, they might do better to consult with a real lawyer initially to understand what they might realistically achieve and what kinds of costs and risks would be involved.

'robots.txt' was invented in 1994 - 31 years ago; it has done well but requirements are different these days, it needs extending for AI but not just AI.

* 'User-agent' means that a site needs to know all the names that spiders use to identify themselves. This is hard and cumbersome. 'Crawler' should be possible, values eg:

** 'web-index' - eg google to allow someone to search

** 'AI' - eg ChatGPT

There are prolly several others.

* 'purpose' what can the spider do with the information ? Values eg:

** 'full-index' something like google could keep and serve up the content

** 'show-amount n' like full-index but only show nbytes - this would mean that the user would have to visit the web site to real all of the text. This is something that news sites would like.

** 'train' Use for training AI

** 'fee $n' if this is downloaded a fee of $n must be paid. If the spider operator considers this too much then do not download it. This will have spider owners to wail and gnash their teeth

** 'rate-limit n' do not access the web site more than every n seconds

** 'view region' only view the content if the spider is in geographic region

OK: the above is a first draft and can be improved a lot but is a start. Enforcing this is another matter.

Only sort of. Current artificial models are missing several layers of reasoning over the top. They do a decent ob of modeling speech and writing production, but lack any form of executive function or higher reasoning. They often model a person suffering fluent aphasia. They also lack the inhibition that curbs hallucination and allows for prioritization. Further, they lack the effects of the lower functions that seem to provide energy to the system to bump it out of local minima to the better broader solution. There's a long way to go.

Current work is mostly on the lower hanging fruit of making the part that's been figured out work better.

Because the female mosquitoes from the mating are sterile but the males are fine and carry the trait. Presumably those males mate with unaffected females of their generation and produce another generation of sterile females and carrier males. This can continue until there are no remaining fertile females, then they all die out.

They might bring the owl back, but thanks to their AI, it'll have 6 toes and whinny now.

Disney is ferocious in its protection of its copyright. What happens if you ask an AI about Mickey Mouse, what does it say ? How did that AI learn about MM but by reading copyrighted material or viewing copyrighted movies ?

Has Disney said anything about AI companies using its copyrighted material ?

After that thing get murky, several copies are made but to what purpose ?

Web browser copies it into its cache on disk (used,eg, if you do a page refresh avoid downloading again over the Internet). Is this a legal copy ? This is a standard browser thing. Other similar copies might be made, eq by squid (a caching and forwarding HTTP web proxy). I will ignore these copies as no one seems to be upset about them. (Actually that is not entirely true.)

You read the document, another copy is made that resides in your brain's memory. Is this legal ? It is not mentioned in copyright legislation but it is implied as part of the intended use of the document so that you may learn whatever the document talks about. If a friend is sitting next to you I can see no legislation that prevents s/he from also reading it - thus several copies might be made.

What if, instead, the web browser does not present it to a human but to an artificial human (an AI) then a copy will be made in the AI's memory. It is this copy that is being objected to. What is the difference between a copy being held in grey matter and one in silicon ?

Or is the disagreement not how it is held but the use to which it will be put ? An AI will, presumably, be used for commercial gain, is that the problem ? But if I read a book about Python is that not commercial gain if I get a job as a Python programmer ?

Or is it that the AI might further disseminate the knowledge. We might be getting somewhere here as the Disney Corporation has objected to parents who sing their copyrighted "Happy Birthday" song at their kids' parties.

Whatever. The point is not the copies but the purpose of the copies. This is what needs to be discussed.

I think that we need an enhancement to robots.txt where the web site (copyright owner) can say to what purposes copies may be made. All mechanical readers (ie all but humans) would be obliged to obey it. This would add little overhead, indeed search engine spiders already do so. What uses: web indexing; AI learning; quoting of small sections; quoting of entire document; ... The list of different uses needs discussion. I have zero faith that the AI cowboys would take any heed - they are entitled and seem to think that the world owes themselves a living.

He means that they have learned a few basic, simple Vim commands and then stopped learning. The result is that they can get the job done but it takes a lot more time. If you use a tool a lot continue learning how to use it better, the investment will repay you many times over.

These unicorns have been estimated to have a value of over $1B at an early stage in their life cycle when their income has been small - this valuation is based on speculation as to what might happen in the future. These companies will only be worth over $1B once they have a solid product that is selling well to many customers.

/r/duck

a few tickets for one way seats for Trump and some of his cronies; make the world a better place.