A few months before. Theory checks out.
- 0 Posts
- 8 Comments
jmill@lemmy.zipto Technology@lemmy.world•Humans can be tracked with unique 'fingerprint' based on how their bodies block Wi-Fi signalsEnglish71·2 months agoA truly horrifying prospect.
jmill@lemmy.zipto United Kingdom@feddit.uk•'Climate change doesn't exist,' says Reform UK mayor despite third summer heatwaveEnglish1·2 months agoWell, I can understand the feeling, but it’s not true. Many of the states in between have a better ratio of relatively sensible people to fruitcakes than it looks like, but the fruitcakes have gerrymandered voting districts pretty severely. Which is a self reinforcing issue.
jmill@lemmy.zipto Fuck AI@lemmy.world•Anthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rules8·2 months agoIf you made money doing that, it probably would be illegal. You would certainly get sued, in any case.
jmill@lemmy.zipto Fuck AI@lemmy.world•Anthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rules13·2 months agoOf course. But I’m not a machine churning out an endless spew of those bits and pieces with no further creative input. I’d be on the side of giving any truly conscious entity rights (including creative ones), but LLMs are not, and I don’t think ever could be, conscious. That’s just not how they work, to my understanding anyway.
jmill@lemmy.zipto Fuck AI@lemmy.world•Anthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rules13·2 months agoBut you can’t make copies of it and sell them.
jmill@lemmy.zipto Fuck AI@lemmy.world•Anthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rules18·2 months agoIn this analogy, the AI uses books like a remix DJ would use bits and pieces of songs from different tracks to splice together their output. Except in the case of AI, it will be much harder to identify the original source.
That’s the real highlight for me.