Apparently “💩” has been the official answer from Twitter’s press relationship contact for some months now… would be funny if it got considered as they’re making legal statements.
Unfortunately the article states a yearly treatment cost would be about $90K with all expenses factored in. Patients with Medicare will likely not be able to get coverage for this, and Medicaid will still require a copay of 20%.
Like every other industry, pharmaceutical companies are profit driven and will maximize their revenue whenever possible, especially when they know the patient population is desperate.
A big example of this was when Pfizer discontinued their research program to cure heart disease, since it is more profitable to charge patients for statins for the rest of their life than it is to cure them.
I feel like this is less of a big decision and more of a ‘duh’ sort of situation. To my understanding this isn’t saying that all AI art violates copyright, but that AI art which does violate copyright can’t be used.
Like if i took a picture of Darth Vader and handed it to NightCafe to fool around with, that still belongs to Disney. Steam is legally required to act if a valid DMCA is sent, and to adhere to the court’s ruling in the case of a dispute.
I feel like this is a reassurance that they intend to obey copyright law rather than a restriction of all AI art. Basically they’re saying that if you DMCA someone in good faith on the basis of derivative works, they’ll play ball.
Right, the phrasing is “copyright-infringing AI assets” rather than a much more controversial “all AI assets, due to copyright-infringement concerns.”
I do think there’s a bigger discussion that we need to have about the ethics and legality of AI training and generation. These models can reproduce exact copies of existing works (see: Speak, Memory: An Archaeology of Books Known to ChatGPT/GPT-4).
Sure, but plagiarism isn’t unique to LLMs. I could get an AI to produce something preexisting word for word, but that’s on my use of the model, not on the LLM.
I get the concerns about extrapolating how to create works similar to those made by humans from actual human works, but that’s how people learn to make stuff too. We experience art and learn from it in order to enrich our lives, and to progress as artists ourselves.
To me, the power put into the hands of creators to work without the need for corporate interference is well worth the consideration of LLMs learning from the things we’re all putting out there in public.
I remember when all of my friends would laugh at the iPod Nano, when it released as being super thin, due to all the people accidentally sitting on them or other easy ways in which they broke.
I would prefer it if manufacturers made phones with smaller screens, so I can actually use it with one hand without some janky workaround (like right/left handed modes on Google Keyboard).
I wonder how this will end up working. I want to use chat gpt without an account and while logged into a VPN and to have unlimited requests… would be nice if this was the solution to this.
The problem is that creators aren’t getting paid their fair share, and these platforms leech off of their creativity. I hate to be “that guy”, but this is where NFTs actually have a use case. Give power directly to the creators of their music by allowing them sell directly to fans. This gives power to the creators and to the listeners who own the NFT. Embracing new technology is a way to break beyond corporate enshittification. We must break past “you will own nothing and be happy” and it seems like blockchain is one of the only ways to do it technologically.
The problem is that legacy rights holder (the middlemen) have no incentive to use blockchain to cut themselves out. They have the legal high ground and are not going to give it up.
Right, and blockchain/NFT have nothing to do with that problem. Xbox could have implemented the exact same program without a blockchain, they just wanted the buzzword in the headline.
“By implementing a blockchain-based network and streamlined royalty processing, game publishers and Xbox benefit from a more trusted, transparent and connected system from contract creation through to royalty settlements”
Trust is the key ingredient added by blockchain. Traditional databases couldn’t be trusted to be honest.
People have a negative image of NFTs because of the speculation and early (crappy) implementations of the technology. It’s just a technology. I think web3 will be the answer to a lot of the corporate enshittification issues we see today. Community owned and operated networks and organizations are the future.
engadget.com
Top