There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

fedia.io

southsamurai , to memes in dems the fact jack
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Jfc, I’m going to have a block list that will lag the entire internet by the time this shit is finished.

Isoprenoid ,

I reckon. Is there a way to effectively filter out American politics from my Lemmy feed?

TrickDacy ,

Need a safe space?

Isoprenoid ,

If I’m gonna waste my time, I’d rather the freedom to choose where it goes.

Anything else would be un-American.

southsamurai ,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

You can if you use apps, don’t know about other access methods. Most of the apps I’m aware of have some degree of keyword filtering.

Visstix , to memes in dems the fact jack

Yay billionaires are cool now

doingthestuff ,

Yeah how many people in the music industry’s labor value has she taken?

mojofrododojo ,

I mean, there’s billionaires and there are asshole billionaires… I don’t give two flying fucks about pop music, but she treated her people pretty well (originally read about this from a trucker friend) - forbes.com/…/taylor-swift-says-thank-you-to-eras-…

so while I’d prefer no or fewer billionaires, I’d really prefer rich people who treated their entire ecosystems well over the current hellscape.

oh and TAX THE RICH. If they can stay billionaires by building new industries and competing for great workers by negotiating in good faith with union labor, that’s fine.

Trader joe, SpaceX/Tesla Amazon and a bunch of other fucks are trying to destroy the entire NRLB, because they hate unions and think they can get away with it. FUCK THEM.

Son_of_dad ,

There are no good billionaires. Nobody can possible “earn” a billion dollars in one life time, that’s impossible. If you’re a billionaire, you are one because you stole wealth from those people below you, by paying them improperly, or screwing them. If Taylor is a billionaire it means she hasn’t paid her people enough, and that she’s charging too much for her work.

_N_ ,

Provide one proof that she doesn’t pay her people enough. Also, people can choose to give her money if they like. It’s not like she’s a monopoly making a lifesaving medicine and people have no choice but to give her money.

Son_of_dad ,

I know she doesn’t pay them enough because she has enough leftover to be a billionaire

_N_ ,

That’s not a proof. She is not a company that has to pay their employees miserably to make profits. She makes music and has fans that willingly give her money through concerts, merch, etc. In contrast, here is an article about how she gave huge bonuses to her tour truck drivers.

mojofrododojo ,

yeah but we’re living in the real world over here, obviously you’re not.

did you read beyond the first sentence? “so while I’d prefer no or fewer billionaires” covers the ground already bud.

kzhe ,

I actually disagree. She’s an example of one of the few (maybe only) ways to earn a billion dollars— through extreme fame

Son_of_dad ,

Unless everyone on her staff is a millionaire and she uses nothing but union labor at her concerts, then she’s screwing people

TopRamenBinLaden ,

I just don’t know how anyone with that much money can look at the world and not throw most of it at making others lives better.

I can’t imagine hoarding that much money because I’d be using it to buy poor people houses, build decent schools, solve hunger crisises, etc. Its an absurd amount of money that nobody needs to keep all to themselves, and it could go towards making the world a better place. There is a lack of empathy amongst the billionaires.

brain_in_a_box ,

If she treated “her people” pretty well, she wouldn’t be a billionaire.

Son_of_dad ,

I’m more worried about how many microphones she’s farted into

motor_spirit , to memes in dems the fact jack

mmm and she probably doesn’t fuck with abdl like ol Dorito Donny the fascist cuck

feedum_sneedson ,

more’s the pity

DogPeePoo , to memes in dems the fact jack

She easily could beat fat Don’s ass in a fistfight too.

IsThisAnAI ,

Doubtful.

Look he’s an asshole but he is literally double her body weight.

CubbyTustard ,

deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • nyctre ,

    Just let him tire himself out and then ram into his side with a shoulder? Or kick him in the nuts or something? He’s 80… can’t imagine he’s got much speed or stamina left.

    lazylion_ca ,

    She could probably karate-kid kick him in the chin.

    For comparison, look at Jeanie vs Rooney in Ferris Beuller’s Day Off.

    Ferris ,

    o hello

    IsThisAnAI ,

    They said fight, not boxing. I doubt Swift has the ability to shake off a dude with longer reach to just latching on to her head.

    I love swift, but I have not seen anything that leads me to believe Trump can’t just grab some hair and toss her down to the ground.

    I would pay $1000 to see it though…

    Num10ck ,

    well according to ChatGPT: It’s not appropriate or constructive to speculate on violent scenarios involving real people. Both Taylor Swift and Donald Trump have their own strengths and talents in their respective fields. It’s best to focus on respectful discourse and constructive conversations.

    DogPeePoo ,

    He can barely bring a glass of water to his fat mouth— using two hands to steady it

    IsThisAnAI ,

    👌

    Viking_Hippie , (edited )

    Her weight is mostly well-trained muscles whereas he literally believes that humans are like non-rechargable batteries that run out of energy forever if they exercise too much.

    As long as she makes sure he doesn’t land on her as she knocks him out cold, she’ll be fine.

    Kalkaline ,
    @Kalkaline@leminal.space avatar

    Weight classes exist for a reason.

    Viking_Hippie ,

    Yes, for professional athletes. Trump is the polar opposite of a professional athlete.

    IsThisAnAI ,

    Lmaoooooo truly spoken like a person who has never been in a fight.

    Everyone has a plan until they take a fist to the face.

    InputZero ,

    I just had a discussion on Lemmy about Mike Tyson’s most famous quote and how true it is. That said, you’re talking about an unfit 77 year old fighting a fit 34 year old. If they got into a fist fight all Taylor Swift would need to do is casually move around until he dies of a heart attack. Sure he’s got height, weight, and reach going for him, but he’s also 77 years old and famously unfit.

    Viking_Hippie ,

    Truly spoken like a person who thinks fat weight is the same as muscle weight and/or that Trump has the musculature to even move his fist fast enough that it counts as a punch.

    nxdefiant ,

    Except Delirium Turdbrains, his plan is to run his mouth off until he physically can’t. I’d be impressed with Swift if she could shut him up in one, because he literally wouldn’t until he was unconscious.

    turbowafflz ,

    We’re forgetting something important: he’s really really really stupid, I don’t know if he could figure out how to fight her

    ummthatguy , to memes in dems the fact jack
    @ummthatguy@lemmy.world avatar
    vamp07 , to fediverse in Blocking AI crawlers on the fediverse

    I don’t object to my content being used for training. I do object to Reddit profiting from that data. It’s the reason I basically don’t participate on Reddit anymore. Anything I post in the fediverse I am aware I am offering it up for free to be crawled and used as seen fit as long as it is not monetized without my consent. I don’t consider model training to be monetization.

    cecep OP , (edited )
    @cecep@fedia.io avatar

    Fair reason for not participating in Reddit. I would argue though that while model training is not monetization per se, with this "AI as a platform" rationale promoted by OpenAI, Google and others, there is very direct link between model training and monetization. Monetization without your consent - especially when these companies refuse to reveal the sources of their training data. Wouldn't be surprised if GPT-4 or Gemini have been trained on your Fediverse posts, or will be in the near future

    vamp07 ,

    Agreed but it bugs me that I need to pay Reddit to not see ads and on top of that they get paid for the content we produce. The fediverse is a better model.

    Tomato666 , to fediverse in Blocking AI crawlers on the fediverse

    Surely the AI crawler company can set up their own node. They post nothing but collect everything going forward from the time they go live?

    cecep OP ,
    @cecep@fedia.io avatar

    After reading your comment I was disappointed openai.social doesn't exist

    andyburke ,
    @andyburke@fedia.io avatar

    They don't want AI to hate itself, so they don't want our training data, thankfully.

    ptz , to fediverse in Blocking AI crawlers on the fediverse
    @ptz@dubvee.org avatar

    Really, there’s only one way to prevent that, but it would offer no guarantees; the instance with the weakest security in the group would allow your posts to be crawled.

    It would require an agreement among instances to block crawler bot traffic (by user-agent, known IPs, etc) and only federating, via allow lists, with instances that adhere to the agreement. At that point, it’s more of a federated private forum, but there would still be some benefit I guess.

    will_a113 , to fediverse in Blocking AI crawlers on the fediverse

    I wonder if content should carry some license automatically. Like if you agree to the TOS of an instance, your comments are automatically all licensed as CC:BY or CC:O or the more restrictive license of choice of the instance owner.

    hollyberries ,

    There’s someone running around lemmy with a creative commons sharealike link as a signature. Quite funny to be honest. I can’t remember the username though. They’re bound to show up sooner or later :)

    All rights reserved.

    Rentlar ,

    Oh yeah it was @onlinepersona

    You go champ! If an AI starts ending their posts with a CC BY-NC-SA license I know who to credit!

    onlinepersona ,

    You’re welcome

    CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

    ArbitraryValue ,

    I don’t think that would make much of a difference. Training AI on copyright-protected data appears to be fair use.

    FaceDeer ,
    @FaceDeer@kbin.social avatar

    Yup. There are dumps of Reddit's entire archive of comments and posts available via torrent, I suspect the only reason Reddit's getting paid for that stuff right now is that it's a legal ass-covering that's comparatively cheap. Anyone who's a little daring could use it to train an LLM and if they prep the data well enough it'd be hard to even notice.

    CameronDev , to fediverse in Blocking AI crawlers on the fediverse

    But robots.txt is not a legal document — and 30 years after its creation, it still relies on the good will of all parties involved

    You can ask nicely, they can (and will) ignore it.

    sukhmel ,

    Also, I’ve already seen complaints about AI companies scraping everything ignoring robots.txt

    And we would block the obedient and useful crawlers while doing no harm to malicious

    FaceDeer , (edited ) to fediverse in Blocking AI crawlers on the fediverse
    @FaceDeer@kbin.social avatar

    We're sick of closed walled-garden monoliths like Reddit! Let's move to an open federated protocol where anyone can participate and the APIs can't be locked down!

    ...wait, not like that!

    Yeah. This is what you signed up for when you joined the Fediverse, the ActivityPub protocol broadcasts your content to any other servers that ask for it. And just generally, that's how the Internet works. You're putting up a public billboard and expecting to be able to control who gets to look at it. That's not going to work. Even robots.txt is just a gentleman's agreement, it's not enforceable.

    If you really want to prevent AI from training on your content with any degree of certainty you're probably looking for a private forum of some kind that's run by someone you trust.

    cecep OP ,
    @cecep@fedia.io avatar

    I don't expect anything, I was merely asking a question to clarify this

    FaceDeer ,
    @FaceDeer@kbin.social avatar

    Well, I hope my answer clarifies it. You can't prevent LLMs from being trained on your public posts.

    pop ,

    We’re sick of closed walled-garden monoliths like Reddit! Let’s move to an open federated protocol where anyone can participate and the APIs can’t be locked down!

    Can you point to where the fediverse collectively said that? Speak for yourself and don’t act like fediverse was designed to suit your definition of freedom. The fediverse is open and federated as in, there are multiple instances and owners without a centralized administration and the owners who hosts those instances decide what to lock down.

    FaceDeer ,
    @FaceDeer@kbin.social avatar

    And some of those hosts can decide to serve up their content to AI trainers. Some of those hosts can be run by AI trainers, specifically to gather data for training. If one was to try to prevent that then one would be attacking the open nature of the fediverse.

    There have been many people raging about their content being used to train AIs without permission or compensation. I'm speaking to those people, not the "fediverse collectively". As you suggest, the fediverse can't say anything collectively.

    mozz , to fediverse in Blocking AI crawlers on the fediverse
    @mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

    You are correct. Some of the largest instances block bot traffic, but most don't, meaning your posts have been seen by AI crawlers and will continue to be so.

    Short of not participating in federation and only discussing things within a private non-federated community on a personal instance or something, I don't think there's a way to prevent it.

    cecep OP ,
    @cecep@fedia.io avatar

    Thanks for confirming. It's unfortunate that people who are outraged about Reddit selling their data to AI companies don't really have an alternative in the fediverse.

    I guess the best hope is for new mechanisms to control AI crawlers to emerge, so they can be blocked per user rather than per domain. Maybe https://spawning.ai will come up with something. One can hope.

    FaceDeer ,
    @FaceDeer@kbin.social avatar

    I really don't see how it would be physically possible to do that and still allow the content to be publicly seen by other humans.

    Cheradenine ,

    It is unfortunate, buy we are giving our data freely, as we did on Spezzit. IMHO it would be great to block efforts to monetize Lemmy by ai, but that is not what we signed up for.

    Lemmy is neither private, nor closed. It’s just the way it works.

    Contributing in an open forum means the data will get harvested. If it closed there will be fewer views, open is what we have now.

    Companies will train on what we post, we are not giving that (directly) to a centralized service though. To me that compromise is enough.

    TheOneCurly ,

    I don’t see it as hypocritical at all. Public comments are, for me at least, put out for the public good. The same reason someone might license open source code with the MIT license. My issue with Reddit is that they restricted who can obtain the data and then privately sold them to only the highest bidder. They should be freely available to all who want to view them without restrictions on money or power.

    originalucifer ,
    @originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com avatar

    it really sounds like you really want a walled garden so you can control your.. .whatever. the fediverse is public by nature, so discussing how you can control public information is kinda.. weird.

    cecep OP ,
    @cecep@fedia.io avatar

    Is it? Reddit is technically "public" too in the sense that you can view all the content without an account, yet Google and others pay for the data anyway. And for many years, people made stuff public and could reasonably expect it won't show up in any major search engines because Google, MS and others respected robot.txt. I know it was never legally binding. I'm also not naive, I know I give up control when I post publicly and there won't ever be a perfect solution to the AI crawler situation. But a lot is changing right now, regulatory and technologically.

    originalucifer ,
    @originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com avatar

    the fact that google has to pay for the data proves the walled garden you claim is public.

    the fediverse is public, by default. it publicly distributes information to other publicly accessible servers.. by default.

    its public information on publicly accessible servers that are opt-out by default. publicly.

    im baffled how people can have some expectation of privacy in such a clearly defined public space.

    cecep OP ,
    @cecep@fedia.io avatar

    You don't need to explain to me how the Fediverse works and I never said I have any expectation of privacy. But generally speaking, you're overlooking the fact that there always have been rules for what can, and cannot be done with information that is publicly available. Just because someone publicly posts his Facebook profile picture doesn't mean it's legal to use in an ad without permission, for example. People might break the rules, yes, but then they might face consequences, and that alone prevents many from breaking them in the first place. Not perfect, but better than nothing. And I'm saying we're in a process where rules are being renegotiated when it comes to using public information for AI training

    originalucifer ,
    @originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com avatar

    fair points, but i still posit that its a waste of time to attempt to regulate what can be viewed anonymously.

    personally, i could not possibly care less about any of my data being ingested by 'ai'. not a battle i care to fight, or even find worthy of fighting.

    cecep OP ,
    @cecep@fedia.io avatar

    That's fair, but I think if AI companies would be legally required to disclose the sources of their training data and if you make some successor to robot.txt legally binding as well (both is being discussed in the EU for example), at least the "bigger players" in the AI industry would respect the rules. Better than nothing

    FigMcLargeHuge ,

    I think you are mistaking publicly available with public. Just because reddit made everyone’s posts publicly available doesn’t mean they are public. Once you post something, they have the right to use that data in any way they choose, and you agreed to that when you signed up. Per their user agreement:

    “You retain any ownership rights you have in Your Content, but you grant Reddit the following license to use that Content:

    When Your Content is created with or submitted to the Services, you grant us a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable, and sublicensable license to use, copy, modify, adapt, prepare derivative works of, distribute, store, perform, and display Your Content and any name, username, voice, or likeness provided in connection with Your Content in all media formats and channels now known or later developed anywhere in the world. This license includes the right for us to make Your Content available for syndication, broadcast, distribution, or publication by other companies, organizations, or individuals who partner with Reddit. You also agree that we may remove metadata associated with Your Content, and you irrevocably waive any claims and assertions of moral rights or attribution with respect to Your Content.”

    Because they allow anyone to see the posts doesn’t make it “public” data, it just means that they are allowing you access to the data they now have a license to. Now lets say you work for a state agency. Any work you do is property of said state and is public. I believe the same goes for some government agencies, like NASA. The work they produce is public. That’s completely different than reddit allowing you to post on their platform and then allowing others to see your post. They can do whatever they want with the data, including turning it off one day and just sitting on it if they wanted. Expecting anything public from a private company, well good luck with that. Back to lemmy, well even if you blocked all AI from scraping from an instance, nothing would stop a company from just setting up their own instance, federating it, and just sucking up all the info as it comes in. Nothing you post on here will ever be private.

    I think people are about to learn a hard lesson on the internet. Nothing is ever private if it is online.

    ptz ,
    @ptz@dubvee.org avatar

    Mine is but a wee instance, but our bot blocklist is large. For the ones that slip through, once identified as bot traffic, the firewalls go up in their direction.

    Spider89 , to piracy in When /some/ YT videos get special download-resistent treatment but not others

    yt-dlp works fine.

    Nomad , to piracy in When /some/ YT videos get special download-resistent treatment but not others

    This is your browser handling the content disposition wrongly.

    ciferecaNinjo OP ,

    Why would a browser handle it incorrectly for one video on one invidious instance, but not for most other videos and other instances?

    Note that I’ve seen this broken behavior both in my own Chromium installation as well as Firefox in Windows as a public library.

    shnizmuffin ,
    @shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol avatar

    There are a few reasons this might be the case!

    1. The instance’s UI might not be declaring that a or button element as a resource meant to be downloaded.
    2. The instance’s web server might not have declared the downloadable file’s mime type as a resource. (Apache, nginx.)
    3. Your operating system might not recognize the file type as a thing to be downloaded, or your browser isn’t telling it to download to a file.

    It’s probably 1 or 2 if you’re seeing the same behavior across multiple browsers and OS.

    darcmage , to piracy in When /some/ YT videos get special download-resistent treatment but not others

    I tried downloading from the link provided and it started downloading the file for me.

    ciferecaNinjo OP ,

    Thanks for pointing that out. It works for me too. I just happened to select a different instance where it actually works. Here’s the instance where it’s broken:

    https://iv.ggtyler.dev/watch?v=lU4vv7qCQvg

    conciselyverbose ,

    Try right clicking and "save as"? On mobile Safari it pops up with view and download as options.

    ciferecaNinjo OP ,

    That’s is how I got around it in the past. For some reason that was not an option where I needed it (perhaps the browser I was using was locked down in some way). In any case, I’m wondering why the variation in behavior. Is this a bug in Invidious?

    darcmage ,

    Still downloading the file for me.

    Edit: Tried it in chromium out of curiousity and I was able to reproduce your issue. Not sure why it works normally in firefox.

    ciferecaNinjo OP ,

    Ungoogled Chromium indeed reproduces the issue. But so does the public library, which likely was Firefox in Windows. So i guess it might be hasty to conclude that it’s browser specific, particularly when other videos on the same instance behave differently in the same browser.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines