Riverheart

6 ms·

1.
by Riverheart 1y ago
Well, from recent experience they could make “npm audit” usable without having to use a third party library like “better npm audit”. There’s no filtering or configuration at all. There are so many unimportant or irrelevant vulnerabilities r
2.
by Riverheart 1y ago
Don’t think a lot of people are brushing their pet’s teeth. Fluoridated water benefits more than just humans.
3.
by Riverheart 1y ago
I’m no anarchist, I simply acknowledge that civil disobedience exists. People are responsible for the risks they take in violating the laws they feel are unjust. Frankly, I have little reason to believe a city, state, or person would take t
4.
by Riverheart 1y ago
The wall was a waste of tax payer money and purely theatric since it hasn’t helped. Saying illegal immigration is a problem today basically acknowledges as much if it weren’t also backed up by statistics. https://www.cato.org&#x2
5.
by Riverheart 1y ago
A systematic effort to dismantle the federal government bypassing the legislature entirely, replacing federal employees with people who pledge loyalty to the president over the constitution, firing anybody who would hold him accountable, un
6.
by Riverheart 1y ago
It’s not the style itself but the use of the art to train the model that outputs the style. Anime as a style is not copyrightable. The work anime artists create is copyrightable. Specifically, if you take their copyrighted work and feed it
7.
by Riverheart 1y ago
The capability of the model to infringe isn’t the problem. Ingesting unlicensed inputs to create the model is the initial infringement before the model has even output anything and I’m saying that copyright shouldn’t be assigned to it or it
8.
by Riverheart 1y ago
“In the US, entirely deterministic works are not considered derrivative works as they aren't considered new creative works (if anything they are considered the same as the original)” Okay, so if the inputs to the model are my artwork t
9.
by Riverheart 1y ago
Never proposed a ban, the issue is copyright, use licensed inputs and I could care less. Pro AI people need to stop behaving like it’s a foregone conclusion that anything they do is right and protected from criticism because, as was pointed
10.
by Riverheart 1y ago
Nobody is trying to copyright an image hash and determinism matters because it’s why the outputs are derivative rather than inspired.
11.
by Riverheart 1y ago
I’m not saying it’s better because it’s naturally occurring, the objective reality is that we live in a world of IP laws where humans have no choice but to retain copyrighted information to function in society. I don’t care that text or ima
12.
by Riverheart 1y ago
I’m in the camp that believes that it’s neither necessary nor desirable to hold humans and software to the same standard of law. Society exists for our collective benefit and we make concessions with each other to ensure it functions smooth
13.
by Riverheart 1y ago
I’m saying that retaining information is a natural, accepted part of being human and operating in society. Don’t know why it needed to be turned into an Orwell sequel.
14.
by Riverheart 1y ago
You know why we put up with copyrighted info in the human brain right? Because those are human beings, it’s unavoidable. This? Avoidable. Also, the model isn’t a human brain. Nobody has invented a human brain. And the model might not infrin
15.
by Riverheart 1y ago
You just chided people for having strong opinions about AI infringement without a court ruling to back them up but now you’re saying that creating/promoting an entire industry based on a legal grey area is a social norm that you have n
16.
by Riverheart 1y ago
“Not only that, they also assume or pretend that this is obviously violating copyright, when in fact this is a) not clear, and b) pending determination by courts and legislators around the world.” Uh huh, so much worse than the people that
17.
by Riverheart 1y ago
The collection of the training data is the “scooping up” I mentioned. I assume you acknowledge the training data doesn’t spontaneously burst out of the aether? As for the model, it’s still creating deterministic, derivative works based off
18.
by Riverheart 1y ago
“A legal reality where you can only train AI on content you've licensed would be the worst for everybody bar massive companies, legacy artists included.” Care to elaborate? Also, saying artists only concern themselves with the legality
19.
by Riverheart 1y ago
It makes sense if you don’t think of humans as tools and think of art consumption pre-AI. Very little would be made public if people thought their work would get scooped up to create these models. I, and others, don’t care if the process of
20.
by Riverheart 1y ago
2 + 2 = 4 Nothing inspired or creative about it. It comes out the same every time no matter who calculates it. That’s what people want to copyright except the first 2 is other people’s art and the second 2 are the weights. Why do you think
21.
by Riverheart 1y ago
AI is always human until it isn’t. It’s not copyright infringement if the AI learned from input like a human but also it’s just a tool that can’t copyright its own output. It’s a moral imperative someone ought to make money off that /s
22.
by Riverheart 1y ago
Why should you benefit over the people doing it the traditional way? What’s your argument for the government favoring the disruption of the art economy relied on by existing taxpayers? I have no reason to support your viewpoint solely for y
23.
by Riverheart 1y ago
Copyright is a human construct designed to benefit humans. It doesn’t matter if the process is the same. AI doesn’t need to put food on the table, doesn’t pay taxes, and will never die. There is no reason to treat it the same because it’s d
24.
by Riverheart 1y ago
Software does not get inspired
25.
by Riverheart 2y ago
Since it’s relevant to the discussion, here’s a repost of their latest response. https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/update-on-terms... On Wednesday we shared that we’re introducing a new Terms of Us
26.
by Riverheart 2y ago
Not a nice interpretation of what is being said. Clearly there is nuance that society compromises on certain things that would be problematic at scale because it benefits society. Sharing learned information disadvantages people who make a
27.
by Riverheart 2y ago
Loyalty over credentials, here we go again. Did you say the last election was stolen? Great, welcome to office. Tulsi Gabbard - Director of National Intelligence Matt Gaetz - Attorney General Pete Hegeseth - Secretary of Defense Marco Rubio
28.
by Riverheart 2y ago
I’ve always been satisfied with Leafpad as a Notepad equivalent. No fluff, just a rectangle for dumping text.
29.
by Riverheart 2y ago
I upvoted you for taking the time to answer me. Thank you > It's a 1/1 increase, you're just implying that it would take five employees an hour to make one burger. If five employees each make $1/hour more then that re
30.
by Riverheart 2y ago
Already investigated by a republican committee. See references 14, 15, 16, 17 of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspi... > A joint investigation by two Republican Senate committees released i

More ›