No, I'm not going to play that game. You can google yourself.
If you can't be bothered to support your statements don't expect anyone to be bothered to care about what you have to say.
It's a matter of such renowned concern that you'd have to be willfully ignorant to not be appraised of it.
See above.
Stop using the word insider. It's a weasel word. There's nothing insider about this.
Insider is not a weasel word. The president providing advanced notice of material policy decisions to people who pay him so they can exploit the markets is of course insider trading.
Imagine someone finds out that the SEC is going to ban the trading of cryptocurrencies.
Imagine he tells the world.
Everyone who trades on that is guilty of insider trading
For insider trading to be insider trading it has to be an insider doing the trading or disclosing and it has to be material non public information. Your example fails both tests.
Everyone who trades on that is guilty of insider trading....
Given your example is not insider trading conclusions drawn from your incorrect assertion are themselves also invalid.
Well, to make a not so subtle point, there WAS an armed revolt, but it was in defense of all this, not in opposition.
It's none of those things. It's just seething vitriol. Republican voters, who are predominantly poor, sick, and uneducated, have been told for years that they're poor and uneducated because of the only people on this earth who don't want them to be poor, sick, and uneducated. The GOP can't succeed without a huge tribe of victim voters who can only be trained in base instinctive behaviors like hate and violence.
Meanwhile the Democrat lemmings here ignore people like Nancy Pelosi. Multiple people in both houses having been doing this crap for decades and you so called educated folks ignore that very obvious fact.
But but but Trump.
This is exactly why I rarely post here anymore. Your TDS has blinded you. Just like how you ignore that the DSA is taking over the DNC while you aren't paying attention.
Do you believe it is possible to ever focus on a given topic without being required to evaluate every other instance of any other situation that could be remotely construed to be similar having ever occurred in human history?
If you were in court defending a client from a murder charge would you chastise the court for their failure to enumerate all the other murders who murder too? Would you drone on about how it is unfair to single out your client while asserting the court is suffering from MDS (Murderer Derangement Syndrome)?
But insofar as I can tell, that original 404 Media story largely amounts to "my friend heard from another friend that they're doing it with RARE books". Â\_(ãf)_/Â
Why would LLMs benefit from scouring RARE old books? What benefit would the rarity serve, when likely the texts are reprinted in umpteen subsequent editions that - to put it bluntly - nobody wants?
Are they buying an original copy of Samuel Pepys diary (first printings $4000) when they can get the umpteenth reprint for 17 cents? So yes, they're "destroying an old book" but rare? Why would they pay for rare?
You know how I know? Because I've been trying to unload a cache of 'rare old books' for a decade and nobody wants them.
1935 Platt & Munk Indian Series 3 pics â" Iâ(TM)ve only ever seen sets of 8, this is 16
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Maximilian I., der Grosse (2 pics) 1876
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Massive Norwegian Bible 1891?, rough shape, 7 pics gorgeous rebinding candidate, probably 14â x 10â x 4â?
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Worldâ(TM)s Great Classics, The Federalist Papers 3 pics, 1901
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Roman London â" 1926? 1 pic (contents on web at https://archive.org/details/in... )
https://photos.google.com/shar...
William the Silent 2 pics, 1911
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Knightâ(TM)s History of England, 4 vols, first American Edition, 2 pics 1880
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Guizotâ(TM)s Concise History of France 1881? 2 pics (Curiously, different than the version in the Library of Congress in that itâ(TM)s missing the printing date (see pics) â" LoC version here: https://babel.hathitrust.org/c... )
https://photos.google.com/shar...
A Guide to the American Battle Fields in Europe 1927 4 pics great maps.
https://photos.google.com/shar...
England and Germany 1740-1914 3 pics, 1918
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Schillerâ(TM)s Thirty Yearsâ(TM) War â" 3 pics â" 1897?
https://photos.google.com/shar...
History of the United States, vol 1
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Operation Greenhouse â" briefing pamphlet, 2 pics 1951 âoeRestrictedâ
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Home Life in Far Away Lands (textbook) 1928 clearly loved
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Simondâ(TM)s Travels in Switzerland Vols I and II , 1822
https://photos.google.com/shar...
5000 New Answers to Questions 2 pics 1933
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Union Now With Britain, 1941 4 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Advanced Geography 2 pics textbook 1925
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Christian Stockâ(TM)s Hamiletisches Real-Lexicon 3 pics, 1890s?
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Thoresbyâ(TM)s Letters 4 pics Vol I and II, 1822
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Praediekener 2 pics, 1760
https://photos.google.com/shar...
On the Field of Glory 1906
https://photos.google.com/shar...
A Primer of the War for Americans 1914 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Sabotage! The Secret War Against America 1942
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Vore Husdyr 2 pics 1902
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Maori & Settler 1900? 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
The History of England 2 pics Vol V, 1910?
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Gregg Speed Studies, Anniv Edition 2 pics 1929
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Parallel Source Problems in Medieval History 1912, 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Swedish New Testament 1886 4 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
A History Of France, Arlington edition 5 pics 1881
https://photos.google.com/shar...
A History of Western Europe 3 pics 1904
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Auswahl von Predikten 1829 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
World Politics at the End of the 19th Century â" 1902
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Republic or Empire: The Philippine Question by Wm Jennings Bryan SIGNED BY WM JENNINGS BRYANT 1899 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Psalmebog 1833 3 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Danish-English Dictionary 3 pics, 1845
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Collection of New Testament Histories 1805 3 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Slips of Speech 1922 3 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Biblehistorie 1888 no cover 1 pic
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Contes et Recits 1896 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
A Handbook of the War for Readers, Speakers, and Teachers 1918 1 pic
https://photos.google.com/shar...
FM21-100 Basic Field Manual 1 pic July 1941
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Look to Jesus 1904 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Seven Chances (play) 1924 2 pics
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Sherwin Cody Nutshell Collection of Books 1927 3 pics 12 books (2 maps pictures NOT included in this set)
https://photos.google.com/shar...
Minneapolis and St Paul Street Maps including streetcar lines â" year not yet determined
I take native Hawaiian religious objections seriously. These are people who take a fatalistic "Pele will take what she wants, it's pointless to try to stop her" attitude toward lava flows running over their houses that seems utterly insane here in Iceland. We'll buy up every available water pump on the international market and walk on active-flowing lava fields to save a harbour for a couple thousand people. We'll keep running tourist sites right next to a volcano that erupts every couple months by building multi-story-high berms around it with giant bulldozers and cooling anything that tries to overtop to make the berms even higher. And it totally works . But Hawaiians will sit back and watch incredibly slow-flowing flows with easy diversion paths take out everything they hold dear. At best they'll point to some primitive failed attempts in like the 1940s as a reason to not try, but then when pressed, it often comes back to: "Pele will take what she wants to take."
Another example: geothermal drilling on the Big Island. Massive protests. Massive resistance, way beyond the token NIMBY resistance here. Meanwhile Hawaii continues to generate most of its electricity from oil, at great cost. Hawaii is the only other place (outside of Iceland) to have accidentally drilled into a magma chamber. In Hawaii they treated it as a major incident and immediately shut down the well. When we did it? Our reaction was, "WOW, we can produce REALLY hot steam from THIS well!", made it into a production well, and started planning to drill more.
I guess one major difference here is that in the early Icelandic cosmology, volcanoes weren't the product of a high-ranking creator goddess, but rather, Surtr, who was practically a demon and was fated to destroy the world. It's good to resist Surtr!
Except his complaint is not.
Yes, it literally was. The main public complaint of the weavers was that they spent their entire life learning their art, and then their bosses come in with a machine that they teach to replicate the patterns that they developed, churn out cheap "slop" versions of them, and fire them.
And here we're talking about profits, despite their huge scaleup expenditure. Theirs and OpenAI's margins on serving inference are ~40%.
It's almost impossible for a company undergoing a massive scaleup rate to turn a profit, let alone growing 10X annualized for 3 1/2 years running, but Anthropic pulled it off.
https://www.science.org/conten...
I guess not.
Woke is what happens when you go to see a movie and instead of being told a compelling story woke ideology is proselytized
Recursion (n): See "recursion"
It's hilarious how obsessed you people are over a term that you can't even define and that none of you agree on. As far as I can tell, the only thing "woke" means today is "I'm A Right Winger, And This Is Something That I Personally Hate". I've seen people describe concepts as unrelated as "the concept of a metaverse" and "removing copyrighted materials to avoid lawsuits" as "woke".
An example of woke AI slop is Everything Everywhere All at Once
Um. What?
That movie was filmed from January to March 2020. You think AI video was a "thing" then? The movie premiered in March 2022. The infamously awful "Will Smith Eating Spaghetti" AI video was what AI video looked like in 2023. AI video was not "a thing" back when that movie was being made. What you actually hate is that movie's CGI.
Secondly, since when is "Jackass"-style "bro" stuff** famously leftist? Sexual gags are stereotypically "bro culture" and stereotypically disliked by feminists in particular and leftists in general. Don't get me wrong, you'll also find some people on the left who like that stuff, but the right tends to buy into it more (men tend to vote more rightward).
As far as I can tell from this, what you actually hate is (A) CGI, and (B) bro culture. Based on this, what you should actually consider yourself is an AI-supporting leftist.
That entire video sits firmly in uncanny valley.
I've shown it to about a dozen people in person without telling them it was AI first, and not a single person noticed. It's only "uncanny valley" because you've been told in advance that it's AI.
It's like my favourite social media hobby: when I encounter anti-AI people, I post things made by humans, generally masterpiece paintings or award-winning photographs, suggest that it's AI, and then watch them tear down how awful and fake and soulless it is. It's pretty hilarious
So what you actually want is more taxes on the wealthy? If so, just say that. Don't hide behind arguments about copyright or that sort of stuff when that's not your actual motivation.
but while machine looms only put people out of work,
Machine looms, along with all of the other equipment of the industrial revolution, led to a massive boom of prosperity across the population as a whole. Machine looms in specific made clothing far more affordable to the average person.
One can criticize the politics of the early industrial revolution for not doing enough to funnel the wealth down quickly enough or to regulate the robber barons, but it was overall a massive benefit to quality of life of society as a whole.
LLMs are doing that plus going into systems that abuse them in lots of other ways.
And the industrial revolution made it easier to make bombs and bullets. That doesn't mean that we should all go back to medieval Europe where the average person lived on the edge of not affording their next meal and society had to dedicate almost all of its resources to basic production rather than things like education, medicine, science, etc. Or reject even more technology and ultimately end up back as paleolithic hunter-gatherers where 40-50% of people died before age 15.
Good or bad is irrelevant. What AI is, is inevitable, as technology advances always have been. Fighting it means you're spending your time doing that instead of preparing for it, which means . . . you're unprepared when it happens
Trying to block the road of progress will just get you steamrollered.
This is a load of BS. Everyone gets a vote. Technology is merely a means to an end.. a tool to get shit done. What constitutes progress is both subjective and distinct from technology. They are completely different concepts and should never be confused.
For example technological means to nullify the strong force using $20 worth of materials from your local electronics store would certainly constitute "technology"... yet unless your idea of progress is randos with nothing better to do vaporizing entire cities such "technology" would constitute regression not progression.
Likewise if all AI ultimately brings is aggregation of power into ever fewer hands enabling tyranny and devaluing everyone there are likely to be many who would not consider this to be "progress". Technology does not in and of itself constitute progress.
Bad AI includes AI that infringes copyrights during the training phase. If this AI has been trained (even partially) on content found on the Internet, then it's bad AI. (*)
Copyright concerns only the performance or (re)production of works and derivatives. It expressly does not constrain any other use, facts, styles.. etc embodied in a work including learning by a person or machine from that work. Training AI is clearly transformative and so there is no copyright interest. While it is possible to violate copyright during training by for example making "fixed" reproductions of copyrighted material in the training workflow it is also possible to train an AI on copyrighted works without having done so. Thus the argument is effectively reduced to quibbling over pointless technical modalities.
What I'm waiting for is people to start training up models against known data sets in a bit for bit reproducible manner. When the aggressive derivative work complaints roll in from IPR groups you would have something that can be taken to court to demonstrate production was done without knowledge of infringing work. AI use then becomes a means of reducing legal liability.
1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight -- it's not just a good idea, it's the law!
