If I recall correctly the fastest object ever was a manhole cover after an explosion. If it was sentient then it would be the fastest creature.
BRB, going to look up the incedent.
Edit: Here you go
During the Pascal-B nuclear test of August 1957, a 900-kilogram (2,000 lb) iron lid was welded over the borehole to contain the nuclear blast, despite Brownlee predicting that it would not work. When Pascal-B was detonated, the blast went straight up the test shaft, launching the cap into the atmosphere at a speed of more than 66 km/s (41 mi/s; 240,000 km/h; 150,000 mph). The plate was never found. Scientists believe compression heating caused the cap to vaporize as it sped through the atmosphere.
A one ton iron vent cap (sewer plate) moved so fast it vaporized. Iron into gas, just add velocity in atmo. That’s so fucking cool.
The trouble with cloudflare is that there is just one. It’s one of the best registrars out there, the only free/cheap and usable DNS host (have you seen what route53 charges per zone??). That without getting into the whole tunnels and DDoS mitigation end of things, which is nearly unique at any price point.
The problem with cloudflare is that we’re missing three other cloudflares to move to if they decide to pull evil shit.
The bigger trouble is creating a CDN has a stupidly high barrier to entry. You literally need your own data centers across the world, your own server infrastructure, the man power to manage it, etc.
You could try to host it on a cloud provider but you’d go bankrupt even quicker. Unless someone were to try to build a co-op run CDN, it’s just not gonna happen without a profit motive and a large amount of capital.
I once realized so many of my favourite businesses were cooperatives. I started thinking of what other co-ops I could start and grow. The excitement faded once I realized it would have to not be about the money.
I feel like something like www.storj.io is on the path to what we would want/need?
There might be some additional requirements for a true CDN to ensure data is closer to where it’s needed and in as many regions as needed though with the right amount of bandwidth. The data gets stored all over the place, but that doesn’t mean its optimal. But they do seem to claim it’s faster on their website…
Edit: For those not wanting to click, TLDR is they use excess storage around the world and make it accessible anywhere, and safe from failures. People with excess storage can join the network if they have enough storage/bandwidth and pass some tests. Their API is S3 compatible.
I mean the optimal cdn is maximally distributed to reduce load and latency right. Unfortunatly the web was not built in a manner that supports this.
Eg if we could have a single url for the same object that could be served by any server that is part of the fediverse then the fediverse itself would be an optimal cdn.
Perhaps we should take some notes from peertube. Plus more legitimate bit torrent content on the internet as a whole is hardly a bad thing make the isp’s jobs harder for places without net neutrality.
I consulted with professor gpt and it seams that it’s basicly just giving the same ip address to multiple servers meaning that any of said servers can serve as that ip.
Also it seems said ips require paying large sums of money to isps. My poiny was more that with the current mainstream internet (http websockets etc) it would require you to run a local service/proxy that can interpret a global id and route to basicly any small server with said resource. Unfortunatly i dont think its possible to build such a thing that would just work across browsers if embedded into a standard webpage.
It’s only a good registrar if you don’t care about privacy and you’re ok with their selection of TLDs (selected only from registries without privacy).
The free accounts do not benefit from DDoS protection. Re-read their terms of service, they’re vague on purpose. If you were ever DDoS’ed (I don’t know who would bother btw but that’s another discussion) they’d just drop you.
You can establish the tunneling thing on your own with any VPS.
The problem with cloudflare is that we’re missing three other cloudflares to move to if they decide to pull evil shit.
You can and should diversify your services and spread them to different providers that are easy to switch. I’ve been with “all in one” providers before, they inevitably end up leveraging their convenience into all sorts of crap. But until you get burned a couple of times they look really good.
Contact support and tell them how many you need and they’ll try to accommodate you. There were a lot of people abusing the service and hosting hundreds of domains so now they’re making everybody request them explicitly unfortunately. They’ve also had to suspend their .dedyn.io DDNS service indefinitely because of the abuse.
That’s why we can’t have nice things.
Please read up on DNSSEC because you will be required to turn it on for every domain you host with them.
I’m not seeing bunny.net on that list, it has a DNS service with API. They have a minimum account maintenance fee of $1/mo and when you load up your account you have to load a minimum of $10. So basically it’s $1/mo for which you get a lot of DNS and CDN service included (20M DNS queries and 100GB transfer).
mmm, unironically sounds like me. According to my iq test i had PhD level intelligence at 18, and what am i doing at 24? unemployed, playing video games, and crying
nah IQ tests are more or less bullshit, they’re incredibly flawed and biased, only situation you’d see me talking about them at lenght is bashing the entire concept of trying to quantify general intelligence
Some tourists in the Museum of Natural History are marveling at some dinosaur bones. One of them asks the guard, “Can you tell me how old the dinosaur bones are?”
The guard replies, “They are 65,000,011 years old.”
“That’s an awfully exact number,” says the tourist. “How do you know their age so precisely?”
The guard answers, “Well, the dinosaur bones were sixty five million years old when I started working here, and that was eleven years ago.”
Nah man, most times there are restrictions on font size. That’s why you Find All and Replace all the periods with periods of a font size 1 higher. Hard to notice but increases page count.
I haven’t edited a wiki page, so maybe I’m missing something. Isn’t that an accurate statement? Until yesterday we didn’t know the verdict, and we still need the sentencing. Both of those absolutely should be added to the page once result are known. Hence why information would/will change.
They’ve locked the article, and it still states the ‘criminal status’.
I get that folks are engaged for various reasons, but Wikipedia isn’t at it’s best when it comes to current events. I feel like that battle will slow as time passes.
Still - a big thank you to those who strive to combat misinformation.
*And you make a great point. Make the edits to Trump’s page after the dust settles and there is no argument about the facts.
Oh his page is going to be locked for years after this if they don’t allow any inclusion. It’s the only way to prevent it from being repeatedly added. We’ll see how it goes. For what it’s worth half the problem seems to be that he has a leading sentence instead of a leading paragraph.
The double standard by conservatives is just… stupid. That’s not how the legal system works. He is now a convicted felon. In a normal American’s world, Donnie would be waiting for sentencing, and often he could be sent to jail to wait for this sentence to occur, before he’s sent to prison(or probation, or home arrest, or whatever). The right to an appeal does not make him “sorta kinda, not a criminal, yet”. If he wasn’t who he is, he’d be in prison for 3-5 years, maybe 10.
Now, Donnie must file an appeal. This takes a while because he needs to prove the conviction was in error, new evidence, something wrong about his defense attorneys or jury tampering. The judge then needs to approve or deny this. Denied appeals, go up the justice food chain to the next court, and the next, and all the way to the Supreme Court who can all but void that conviction and Donnie gets his appeal (unlikely they even view the case). But hey, let’s pretend he somehow gets an appeal.
Now, 2-6 years from now (because our justice system is slow), Donnie can have another trial and have his conviction overturned. But this time he’ll need to basically bribe, threaten and distort all the criminal charges that they used against him.
Is unlikely his conviction will be overturned. His appeals process is just going to muddy the waters, but never bring anything to help. His one saving grace will be the “one juror” he knew would hang the jury, who could say he was forced, or something, to vote guilty.
Until this soap opera is over, Donnie is still a convicted felon. There is no gray area. Ask any other “innocent“ convicted felons serving time while they wait for appeals. Appeals don’t make them less convicted.
Because people don’t understand how copyright works.
In most countries any copyrightable work that you produce is automatically covered by copyright. You don’t need to do anything additional to gain that protection.
Most Lemmy instances don’t have any sort of licensing grant in their terms of service. So that means that the original author maintains all ownership of their work.
So technically what these people are doing is granting a license to their comment that allows it to be used for more than would otherwise be allowed by the default copyright protections.
What they are probably trying to accomplish is to revoke the ability for commercial enterprises to use their comments. However that is already the default state so it is pretty irrelevant. Basically any company that cares about copyright and thinks that what they are doing isn’t allowed as fair use already wouldn’t be able to use their comments without the license note. So by adding the license note all they are doing is allowing non-commercial AI to scrape it (which is probably not what was intended). Of course most AI scraping companies don’t care about copyright or think that their use is not protected under copyright. So it is again irrelevant.
Ding ding ding. It’s basically the equivalent of that “I don’t give Facebook permission to use my statuses, pictures, etc for commercial purposes…” chain letter that boomers love to post. It has enough fancy legalese and sounds juuuust plausible enough that it’ll get anyone who doesn’t already understand the law.
Ohhh come on now, you’ve got too see the irony here. Don’t you get tired of repeatedly adding that license? No, of course not. You just like the attention, it’s okay lol I won’t tell anyone your secret ;)
Don’t you get tired of repeatedly adding that license?
I’d prefer if Lemmy had a signature field as part of the account, so I could put it there once and forget about it, yes.
But otherwise it’s a long press copy, and a long press paste, and I’m done. It’s not rocket science.
No, of course not. You just like the attention, it’s okay lol I won’t tell anyone your secret ;)
No human being on this planet would want to be constantly harassed by, and having to defend themselves from, astroturfers/bots who are trying to prevent other people from jumping on the bandwagon of protecting their content by licensing it explicitly.
It’s a pain in the ass speaking with people like you, especially the when they think that they’re ‘Winning!’ with their assumed snappy replies.
I’ll be explicit, again. Leave me the f alone about my using of a license! If you don’t like seeing the license as part of my comments, FEEL FREE TO BLOCK ME. The repetitiveness is becoming harassment.
protecting their content by licensing it explicitly.
You can do whatever you want, of course. But any license you put on your content here protects it less than not putting any license at all. That’s after all what licenses are for, granting people use of your content.
So you’re not so much protecting your comments, but graciously allowing them to be used for training for non-commercial purposes, where most people are greedily keeping them to themselves. I suppose that’s admirable.
So you’re not so much protecting your comments, but graciously allowing them to be used for training for non-commercial purposes, where most people are greedily keeping them to themselves. I suppose that’s admirable.
You’re not telling me anything that I don’t already know.
I have no problem for my content being used for open-source reasons. Commercial reasons without compensation is another matter.
Now that I understand it, I’ll be able to block the bloc of boneheads.
I know that a broken clock is right twice a day but using a broken clock is just dumb. Out of the 1440 minutes in a day, it gets 1438 of them wrong? Broken clocks get binned.
Definitely along the same vein, except it doesn’t drag a bunch of innocent people into it like SovCitizens do when they drive without a license or insurance or refuse to pay back loans/credit cards.
I don’t care about seeing your content. I’m sure its good. I just believed that the internet was a tool to end data scarcity and instead we’ve moved much further back and now with all this stuff we’re just putting nails in that coffin. I still hold out for a world were data is shared and people collaborate to produce new content.
How does cancelling a pie order at delivery mean that you don’t pay? You try to cancel a dental appointment in less than 48hrs and you still get charged for that appointment
Yeah, apparently, because it was some small business owner, she only invoiced the order, and didn’t have some elaborate no cancellation policy in a contract for an order that size. It’s terribly unfortunate, but she probably should’ve known better (as a freelancer, myself, I once had to learn this very lesson the hard way, although it did not cost me nearly so much). I guarantee she’ll never ever make that mistake again, but, sadly, it may be because she is now going out of business.Tesla are such shit for doing this to her, and the very least they could do is pay for their order.
Eh, if she really wanted to take it to court I'm relatively sure her case is sound. A reasonable man knows you cannot cancel such a large order of perishable goods on short notice. She probably had her own reasons, whether lack of savvy, a belief the media campaign would serve her better, or maybe even just that she doesn't want to go to court.
yeah, well, that’s all fine and good if she could afford a good lawyer to take up her case, but she’s financially screwed because of this and is already struggling to even keep her business open. rich people can afford to just sue everyone who makes them mad, but small business owners like this lady who went out on a limb for this huge order and got screwed may not be able to afford to shell out the money it would cost to engage in a lengthy lawsuit with the legal powers of Tesla.
so, what the law allows her to do and what she is practically capable of doing are probably two very different things in terms of her being able to seek legal remedy.
Just go directly after the person who made the order and take them to small claims court. She could only recoup $10,000 that way, but I believe the person would have to show. Not some lawyer on their behalf. I believe in California, lawyers are not allowed to represent anyone in small claims. Chances are the tesla person wouldn’t even show and several months later the baker would eventually end up with a check.
Setting aside all the practical ways this suit could be handled affordably (e.g., her actual damages were a much smaller monetary sum compared to that invoiced amount and probably eligible for small claims)...
Having a policy around cancellations in the invoices would not materially effect anything here. While it might be helpful to ensure a good-faith customer behaves in a professional and appropriate way, such policies have little effect on a bad-faith customer.
Even without an explicit policy, this is fairly straightforward promissory estoppel, or at least something very much like it. If she had a policy, she would have a very strong case. Without, I still reckon she has a very strong case -- pretty much just as strong. Either way, the recourse is the courts.
the point is that there’s a difference between a legal path for her to pursue her claim and her potential financial ability to do so, and that this represents a fundamental inequality of the application of fair justice for those who can’t afford it.
see, this, then, gets very tangled in the terms of the agreement, and - as there seemingly were none - and lawsuit could get dismissed. or a judge could decide that Tesla is liable anyway, and then Tesla would appeal, costing the business owner even more in legal fees.
if Tesla was ever going to pay the $16k, they would have done it long before engaging in a legal dispute that will end up costing tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars more. at this point, it has nothing to do with money, and everything to do with fucking this lady over as hard as they can to punish her for embarrassing them.
Personally, I’d use their bureaucracy against them.
Send a generic invoice “care of” accounting. knock of the delivery fee. make it as nondescript as possible so it gets handed to the intern that just rubber stamps every stupid thing their stupid CEO gets into.
@FuglyDuck that's a tactic described in the 19th century novel Vanity Fair for evading payment. If your dressmaker sends you a bill then immediately order more dresses.
My guess is someone very wealthy and/or used to doing large scale business just didn’t realize what a big number that is to normal people.
Or has never prepared food in their life.
Or they’re used to ordering like pallets of mountain dew or whatever and decided to go with fresh food instead.
I don’t know. I feel like this falls under “moral incompetence” or something. I doubt it’s a deliberate attempt to screw her over, but it’s also not really acceptable. They should be ashamed.
I really hope whoever made this fuckup is questioning how out of touch they’ve become.
Or the vendor didn’t insist on an initial payment or cancellation fee. I don’t know how this is a Tesla thing - some admin put in an order for some sort of meeting or event and they changed the schedule so she canceled. It happens all the time. This is not Tesla-specific
Google glass never actually “launched” in any meaningful sense of the word, and was a rough-as-fuck user experience.
Ironically what did it in was the ability to record video. People were so panicked about being filmed that they started reacting violently to glass users (called glassholes). From that point on it sort of became a laughing stock. Not cool. A tainted product.
Apple seems to have mitigated the obvious pitfalls, let’s see how it shakes out.
It’s funny that you don’t know what you don’t know. Google glass definitely launched, and is used by certain businesses. They went B2B instead of B2C and apparently did well enough.
In terms of privacy in public, the Vision Pro isn’t much different from Google Glass. Both have video recording capabilities, and both displayed some form of indication when recording.
The only real difference is that the Vision Pro is easier to spot in public due to the bulkier design.
It will be interesting to see if there will be similar “Glasshole” reaction to the Vision Pro once they are seen in public enough.
it’s good proof of “user interaction with site” to sell to advertisers
they can use that to load more ads or refresh current ones after it loads more text, and you’re already bought in on the story so you’re likely going to keep going.
I suspect a third reason is to try adding other news stories at the end in case the current one didn’t grab your attention, but that doesn’t seem to be as consistent amongst sites that I’ve seen do this. I run ad blockers though, so I don’t really see the sites the way they expect me to.
The comment I replied to said that maybe the “read more” button is an effort to conserve bandwidth by only sending half the text.
I said that the text is such a tiny portion of the bandwidth required to transmit a web page that it wouldn’t make sense to try conserving it by only sending half.
You’re absolutely correct in that only sending images on the visible part of the page is a common way to conserve bandwidth.
The cost of making a new request for the rest of the news is higher than just returning the full news. The only use case where this makes sense is where news are behind a paywall and you just want to show a teaser to Anonymous readers.
The only use case where this makes sense is where news are behind a paywall
It can be particularly good in soft-paywall situations, where you want to give people a certain number of clicks per month before they have to start paying.
I don’t think I’ve ever actually seen these “keep reading” buttons used in that way, though.
Not sure where it’s from but I’ve received a bill like that from someone I really cared about a long time ago when I had a bit of a serious drinking problem. I was also homeless at the time.
The $20 bill said, “Not for alcohol,” on it. And the look in their eyes pleaded, “please.”
When I was at the liquor store that evening and I went to pay I didn’t have enough unless I spent that $20. I picked something different and used that money for food that night.
I’d like to say that was the first step in me getting sober but it was a few years later when I finally quit drinking.
I’ll bite. I had a brother with special needs pass away a year ago next week. He was born with cerebral palsy, was blind, nonverbal, totally dependent on caretakers (myself, my siblings and mother, his nurses) for literally everything since he didn’t have functionally-independent motor control. We were told he’d live to 10, and he lived to 29; he was a bundle of joy and loved going out when he could. People would stare and kids would ask questions, but we loved sharing his story and my brother liked when people were curious about it.
But, his health started declining in 2014. He had several close calls, and we told doctors each time to try their best with the circumstances they were given. On more than one occasion, his nurses or our mother would actually be with the doctors during hospital stays to assist with him since he was case they didn’t have much experience in and didn’t want to make his issues worse. That said, he had a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) since he had a trache, and was brittle enough to die from chest compressions.
I prepped for my brother’s death countless times over 8 years. We all did. When he passed, we were so obviously distraught. But we were also relieved, in a way, that he wasn’t in pain anymore in the end. We let out our emotions that had been stored for those years, and the grieving process is still continuing. We all put our lives on hold to help him, and he just became our lives; our goal simply was to make him comfortable and let him know he was loved, knowing we couldn’t realistically do more. We spent years watching him in pain, watching him gradually lose his fervor and personality.
If you read this far, thank you. Not really sure what else to say, I just want to share this since it’s occupied my mind a lot.
TLDR; Preparing for the worst outcomes, coupled with grief, over prolonged periods of time really disrupt your emotions and outlooks. Needless to say, my family became stronger proponents of state-assisted suicide after this experience. It couldn’t be granted to my brother, but maybe we can help people in the future that coupd really use it. People understand, but not nearly as many are truly empathetic because they can’t be - they’ve never been through a similar experience. I simply ask that people try to be sympathetic rather than to pass judgement on others.
The one cause that I’d champion over all others is the right to have access to assisted suicide.
It’s really a travesty how we tend to hide just how grisly dying (and in some cases living) can be, and how those who most go through it inherently lose their voices to advocate for others not suffering the same drawn out fate.
I’m sorry you had to watch as it dragged out.
My SO is a doctor and the cases that most upset them are not the healthy patients that die, but helplessly watching the unhealthy patients that are forced to drag on living because of various factors.
We’re getting much better at unnaturally prolonging life, and while that’s a good thing in some cases where it can change outcomes for the better, there’s a very dark side of it as well that’s gradually getting worse.
Know that it’s not a topic that only you are thinking about, even if it’s unfortunately a topic that is too rarely discussed in public.
I’m deeply sorry for your loss. I am a hospital chaplain, so I have been with families as their loved ones have died in settings like this. If you want to talk to someone, I’m here for you.
I understand the weird feeling of relief when someone dies. I know that sounds terrible. My situation was not yours, so I’m not directly comparing. One of my parents had long, slow cancer. Watching them waste away, choosing to fight a symptom or not, was draining and difficult. In one sense, I enjoyed all of those final moments and would give anything to have more. I miss them dearly. However, I’m glad they’re not suffering. It was difficult at the end. Their quality of life was not good.
Yeah my dad smoked a pack a day his entire life and had started getting a lot of issues with his lungs and health in general. He died of a heart attack not so long ago and while I did grieve him I still feel that’s the best way he could have died
If only it hadn’t happened on my sister’s birthday but that’s life for you
Lemmy is full of people that have never created anything of value frothing at the mouth because they aren’t entitled other people’s creations. I wonder how long it would take them to change their tune if they actually created something worthwhile but got none of the recognition for it if IP laws didn’t exist.
Or, it could be that for once we got access to the same powerful tools the capitalists got access to, and we’re annoyed that the capitalists have been successful at convincing people the tech is evil so that the poors dont use it. (Morals have never stopped corporations from doing anything, so tech being “Evil” only ever stops the general public from using it)
Oh yeah sure. Lemme just dedicate another 5-10 years of my life to mastering a skill when I only have a few hours free a week to unwind after spending all my energy working full time.
Edit: The funniest thing about this take is that the people who spout it think they are defending artists without realising that they are massively devaluing all the time effort and skill artists have put into their craft with the suggestion that basically any working class adult could do what they do if they wanted to
Edit 2: I know its incredibly hard to believe, but some of us just want access to creative freedom, and dont particularly care about the skill that gives us said freedom. Even if I had the pen and paper skills to make my art from scratch, I’d STILL be using Stable Diffusion at this point as it massively speeds up the process, I’d just be doing heavier editing of the results than I already do, and would probably train a LORA off of my own art
Edit: 3 Lmao entitled artists are BIG MAD. Techs not going away, and you’re burning out the empathy of those who could be convinced to use more ethical options as they arise. Instead you want to kill the tech entirely, and so the new generation of artists that use these new tools will ignore your input entirely. Your labour is being exploited, welcome to capitalism. You want change? Fix the systemic issues. You want sympathy? Stop being assholes. AI Generators can be run on personal computers now with no connection to the internet, Pandora’s Box is opened and cannot be closed again. Live with it.
Why do you feel you’re owed the work of people who have spent those years without compensating them or even asking for that matter? You do realise that is unsustainable right?
Because I disagree on whether or not it is theft. I watch the program generate the images from blots and then add more details. The images are made from scratch with techniques learned from the things it trained on. Its not a 1-1 comparison to how a human learns, but its closer than anything before it has been. Most artists have traced or done other taboo forms of learning in the process of acquiring their skills before they have the skillset to charge money for their work, and they CERTAINLY have benefited from thousands of years of art history and culture. Its not as black and white as artists want to make it out to be, its not squeeky fucking clean either, as more ethical options arise, I will use those. But this tech is amazing and has the potential to dramatically change the art scene for the better once those with skills start adopting it more. It will allow more artists to break free from corporate sponsors, to take on bigger solo projects than they were able to before. At the end of the day, its Capitalism stealing work from artists, not the machine. This whole debacle has reminded me that what stopped me from entering the arts as a child was the elitism.
At the end of the day, its Capitalism stealing work from artists, not the machine.
Fully agree on this… but since we live in a capitalist system and until we don’t anymore, it’s still wrong.
The images are made from scratch with techniques learned from the things it trained on.
With no input (in the almost totality of cases) from the artist. None of the artists agreed to have their work being used to train the machine and if their work is being used for that they deserve to be compensated.
The fact that you are talking to me right now means you are using a computer chip in some way, it is literally IMPOSSIBLE to participate in Capatalist society and live an ethicly clean life. We all have different lines on which ways we’ll opt out in order to sleep better at night. At the end of the day, fair compensation is an impossible task considering its not 10’s of artists that got used, its quite literally all of the available images on the internet, Thousands if not hundreds of thousands of artists work, living and dead. Thats like asking a human artist to create their art in a vacuum, to forget all of the artists that inspire them, forget their culture, forget their muses that they dont even know inspired them. Even if you could assign a $ value and somehow contact that many people, their fair value would be less than a penny. For the core tech? Low numbers of art wouldnt work, the machines would need examples innumerable in order to start learning what the hell an apple is in 70 different art styles. I’ve stopped using artists styles as prompts, because yeah, there there is a specific artist I am grabbing from, and I’m not doing it with their permission, and so I stopped.
You can’t just use Capitalism to wash your hands of every amoral action. I mean… clearly you can, but you shouldn’t. The fact that fair compensation is impossible is literally the reason why ai is getting (rightfully) shit on by so many people. The fact that huge vc funded corporations went “yeah we needed a lot of data, but it would have cost us way too much to get it ethically so we just swiped it” is disgusting and the reason ai should be shut down. It’s so weird to me that so many anticapitalists have been enthralled by ai when they are made by huge companies that are profiting from work they stole… literally the capitalist wet dream. How exactly is that fighting against Capitalism?
1: Stable Diffusion is free my dude, no capitalist profits off of my using it
2: Literally ALL of modern society is built off progress made by disgusting methodology. Look up Unit 731 and the Tuskegee Experiments for a small sample of things that have benefitted our knowledge of biology and vaccines
3: It wasnt hard and expensive to track down the permission to use the data needed to start the process of machine image learning, it was IMPOSSIBLE, and fair compensation in regards to image importance would have been significantly less than a penny for an artists entire library of work. I havent seen this much backlash towards Pinterest, which also just hosts whatever images someone uploads, regardless if they are the owner of said image
5: To reiterate, for once, this powerful too is free to use. It is not only benefitting the capitalist class. Any artist is fully capable of using this tech as well without giving any capitalists a penny.
6: Should we start asking humans to list literally every piece of artwork they have ever looked at when they post an image they made? Because its similar levels of influence. The images the machines learned on are not stored in the code, the lessons learned are. All works produced are derivatives, and not rips or traced
7: The arguement the pro artist side makes is never ‘lets make this tech ethically cleaner’, its 'lets kill this tech in its cradle because we dont like its origin. Which is elitist and privileged, OF COURSE artists dont need this tech or see immediate use for it, they already have the skills to acces their creative freedom. Others like me arent as privileged, hence why there are a LOT of people celebrating having a tool that gives us access such freedom. So no, I dont owe these artists any more than those artists owe disney for the movies they watched growing up that inspired them to start creating. They dont have a monopoly on creative imagery anymore, and their reaction to that has made me lose a lot of empathy towards them. Because they are not entitled to my money, not entitled to my empathy, and I’m not the one taking their jobs away, nor am I enriching any of the ones who are by using a free piece of software. I’m not even adding to their competition, as I’m not selling anything that I make, I’m only making it for myself and my friends.
8: Again, why is the line being drawn now, when this arguement applies to literally EVERY advancement in tech. Yes, we should aim for better, but why isnt that ideal being applied equally to all fields?
TL:DR edit: Work with us to make and transition to an more ethically clear tool, and a lot of us will agree and follow. Continue to call us theives and entitled and try and just kill the tech in its cradle, and we’ll call you out on your hypocrisy, and ignore you, as well as eventually replace you as the workfield adapts and integrates, only for the cycle to repeat when new tech replaces AI Tech
FWIW I’ve been creating IP as a career for a long time. I still want what OP wants, a UBI instead.
This is where people usually suggest that I start unilaterally sharing my work right now, ignoring the economic assumptions behind why a UBI would be necessary to replace IP.
I’m in your same position and fully agree. An UBI would be way better… but until that exists it’s not right that people make use of my work for their own profit.
There’s nothing about abuse in the comment you replied to. In fact, the act of “protecting small time creators and artists” goes through the legal system, funding it like the commenter said…
kbin.life
Top