This is uselessly metaphysical.

I'm not seeing a paywall on the site. uBlock Origin must be doing something.

The UHF app on our Apple TVs & iOS devices and the UHF Server in Docker to act as a PVR gives us everything for a few $ a month paid in crypto.
We haven't had cable since ~1999-2000. Downloading and the *arrs have kept us happy, but the better half wanted to check out some live sports. So IPTV it was.

One of our guys said something to the effect of "Copilot is Corporate Chat. It knows all the useless filler of management-speak, but lacks the competence of the people in the trenches.

Ouch.

I've used Claude at home for ages. Work was wanting to get some AI stuff for us and the only 'blessed' one is CoPilot. Everything else it blocked. All senior management seems to know about AI is "Hurrr... Copilot and ChatGPT."

Out team of ~8 (pentestesting & VA) were unanimous about Copilot being crap and Claude being the top dog. So some higher ups OK'd a Claude Teams package for work. To bypass the CorpSec tards, we use it from our lab environment that has its own unmonitored link and IP range.

Anthropic/Claude is just so far ahead of OpenAI/ChatGPT and MS/Copilot it's not funny.

If Meta bought all the books they trained their AI on, it seems to me they should be allowed to do that. If you've purchased a copy of a book, you're allowed to analyze it with a computer.

Seems like it'd be a huge cost savings. And frankly, AI is more ethical than a sociopath, so it's a win-win.

...through fear-mongering and telling congress that people shouldn't have access to AI that OpenAI doesn't control.

I figured someone would bring up the myth of "the myth of talent". The art community is the absolute worst about this. To be good at art, you need both innate talent and practice. People who have that innate talent think that practice will get everyone there -- believe me, it doesn't. The reason you think it does is because of survivorship bias. Nobody asks me how I got to not be able to do anything art-wise except create copies of what I can see, so they don't ever find out that I practiced for decades and didn't get anywhere.

As it is, computers and programming are my skill, so I'm using that skill to generate art. Anybody who whines about me doing it that way is gatekeeping.

These sorts of theatrics exactly.

...not because it does.

It's all about gatekeeping the skill, time, and budget floor and propping up the wall between "producers" and "consumers". I worked hard to get where I am, therefore it shouldn't be made easier. I worked hard to make $20/hour, therefore we shouldn't raise the minimum wage. Etc.

The reason there aren't legions and legions of programmers protesting AI on twitter is because programmers are accustomed to change and we've learned to embrace it, yet every time there's a technology that changes how art is made (cameras, digital painting, 3d rendering, even pre-made pigments), there are a group of artists who flip their shit and say that the new technology is going to kill creativity and ruin art as we know it, then fifty years later all of the things that those people insisted are "not art" are in museums and art history books.

I hope a company in China gets ahold of the database and trains a good music generator AI on it and releases it for free.

Smart devices have been spying on you for years now. Don't buy a fridge that spies on you.

...who for some reason deserve to be protected from automation more than fucking literally everybody else, apparently.

AI doesn't "siphon up and launder" code any more than your brain does. Both *can* memorize (which is why sometimes comedians can accidentally steal a joke), but both are also learning from patterns.

AI isn't going to make people stop contributing to open source.