There is a serious problem when a profit--making company provides Operating System software:

Deliberately giving limits to a present version allows the company to charge a lot for a new version, even if the new version provides few important benefits.

Your comment is pants.

Surely you know that's an absurdly dismissive opinion? North Korea has the capacity to gain access to anything anyone else does, especially if it comes from China.

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)

There should be some "friction" in accessing records more than a year or two old.

Whether that friction involves putting the older data in "nearline" storage requiring a robot to mount a disk or tape to access it, or whether it stays online but there's only a "skinny pipe" between it an the internet, an adversary shouldn't be able to transfer the entire database in less than a few weeks, more than long enough for tripwires to activate and a human to investigate.

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)

We need a book that explains how AI technology functions.

There is a huge amount of news and comments, but apparently nothing that helps people understand how AI is developed, and functions.

" an angry person following and harassing someone" - Didn't happen, it was a calm and rational news reporter. You Crossburning Treasonfucking IncestShit GOP KlanBitchtards just lie all day huh?

Do us all a favor DMB, end your life since you're a subhuman Incest-Produced Crossburning GOP Trashfuck.

A Klan Member in the neighborhood is dangerous. DMB should be removed from society since he's a Trashfucking America-hating Bitchboy KLAN TERRORIST SHITBAG.

The Technician is a Bitchboy for a fascist company. Fuck that.

He was harassed and SWATted and the Flock KlanBitchboy made a FALSE POLICE REPORT with ABUSE OF THE 911 SYSTEM both of which are actual crimes.