archontes

My response is typically, "I have literally everything to hide. I don't want you to know my middle name. I don't want you to know what I had for breakfast. It's none of anyone's business."

And weirdly, the response I get is, "Oh yeah, fair."

Wild that they increased the ipad prices as well; the entire point of the ipad is that it's a handicapped tool to avoid cutting into macbook marketshare.

Too many cameras and not enough food.

Now compensate for the oblateness of the Earth.

The way it should work is that if a government can't do a thing, then they can't pay for the same thing.

Remove the demand and the activity will dry up.

Nonlinear.

This has got Russell Vought's fingerprints on it, mark my words.

There's some way this is enshittified.

Sure, but that's a problem for my lawyer, not me.

And sounds like a great way to plead guilty to a lesser crime, but IANAL.

You are correct, which is why that compulsion will be accompanied by immunity.

In America, we have the fifth amendment, and the right not to divulge any information whatsoever unless we're granted immunity.

It is enough to say absolutely nothing, and request the government to prove its case.

If someone shot a person with my gun, I would invoke the fifth amendment, and ask the government to prove who did it beyond a reasonable doubt.

NASA has been downsized with a machete.

And Russell Vought is holding the weapon.

Navy-strength rum.

I can't tell if this is a typo or not, and it's perfect.

Define theft.

If you write a contract and give it to a lawyer with the instruction, "Anyone who satisfies this contract gets this money." And someone satisfies the contract to the lawyer's -but not your- satisfaction, and the lawyer sends the money, did the third party steal from you?

Imagine I write a contract and empower an AI to execute it. I put $10,000 in a bank account and write, "I'd like a nice car."

I do this of my own free will, at my own hazard. I know I'm playing this game. I have intentionally elected to use a system that will execute without any further intervention or oversight on my part. Verbally, I state that I am confident enough in the writing of my instruction that I feel secure in whatever outcome it may bring.

The system automatically executes and someone has sold me a very nice remote control car.

I sue that person.

Why should I have standing?

It's a stretch to call training an AI creating a 'derivative work' by the legal definition.

You could count the words in a book and publish the word count, and while the information is based on the contents of the book, that would fall incredibly short of being a derivative work.

I suspect they committed whatever copyright violation is committed when they downloaded the copyrighted works. Training an AI on them is simply not related to the protections that copyright offers.

I'm not even a Linux "enthusiast". I simply find Windows to be a terrible product and Linux to be a better product. I simply use the least terrible option.

Can it differentiate between different household members?

+1. There's a lot of money invested in having very very high confidence a part is perfect all the way through.

Apologies for the tangent, but may I ask what you use to write your blog? I love how clean it is.

+1 Steam works wonderfully on my Ubuntu VM.

I'm thinking about the motorcycle motor. If they're really lighter than competing motors, I don't see the downside of using them like a traditional motor, taking the weight savings, putting it inside a sealed cavity, and coupling it to a driveshaft. Simplifies some of the other problems with sealing and bearings mentioned elsewhere, avoids unsprung mass.

Do you not think it would be more informative to look at the global percentage of people who are wealthy enough to take multiple bites of the unicorn apple?

Dismissing disagreement as jealousy always bothered me. To think a person is jealous of you requires a lot of ego, like... narcissistic amounts of ego in my opinion. Either that or a world view so small that it can't conceive of other world views that don't align with yours.

Some folks just can't imagine buying what some folks are selling.

We've reached the era of Trurl's Electronic Bard.

https://electricliterature.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Tr...

I agree that interested parties are trying to steer the ship there. I just don't see the legal arguments that will get them there.

Given the fact that images are transmitted to a person in a manner that doesn't violate copyright (and even if they are, the transmitter, not receiver is guilty of infringement), training an AI is not something that copyright law limits.

The AI weights that result are about the farthest thing from a derivative work, as the weights as a separate object, don't seem to contain the slightest remnant of the original work.

I am also not a lawyer; I have some background and training in IP law as it pertains to engineering.

As far as I can tell, the image you describe and your example sentence are closer than you might think to each other. Mickey Mouse is a copyrighted character, and Disney could certainly claim infringement for both. Whether you have a fair use claim is down to the tenets of fair use, and whether they sue you is down to their estimation of how likely it is it'd be profitable for them to do so.

So what is fair use? https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107

Put simply, you have to argue about it in court and decide on a case by case basis, but the factors are:

The nature of use, such as for profit vs. non-profit.

The nature of the copyrighted work. Your art might be considere literary criticism. How central to that message is Mickey Mouse?

The amount and substantiality of the copyrighted work appearing in your work. Mickey Mouse is the sole feature, so large.

How likely is it that your Mickey Mouse creation will serve as a substitute for people consuming normal Mickey Mouse content?

If you put it on the internet, someone can read it.

You try writing a law that corporate America can't corrupt.

I'm a fan of decriminalization rather than legalization, mainly because I believe that people should be able to engage with it, but I don't want companies marketing it. Marketing in the US is too effective, and I don't want to load that gun with anything that makes people less well, because it'll find a way to maximize consumption.