throwaway09223

7 ms·

1.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
Accurate is more important than interesting
2.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
Not really. Clickwrap licensing only came about near the end of the 90s and didn't really take off until post-2000.
3.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
I remarked on how human cognition is treated as a magical process with respect to copyright law. This is just a legal fact. It has nothing to do with how an LLM operates internally, or whether an LLM is at all similar to a human mind in ter
4.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
This has nothing to do with how things operate, or whether an LLM is like a mind. It's a legal question regarding large scale compilation of data. "A machine is not a human mind, so does not benefit from the legal exceptions and r
5.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
> "Purpose and mechanism are not the same thing." No one said they were. You may want to revisit my original observation.
6.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
As I said, human cognition is a special case. The open question is how to handle machines that mimic the process.
7.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
"1) no similarities have ever been demonstrated between large language models and human cognition" This is false. The LLM's entire purpose is to mimic cognition. You could argue that the operation differs in important ways -
8.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
No, that's totally incorrect, we do not consider every observation a "transformative use" as applied to the human mind. If you memorize a copyrighted play and write another play it is NOT inherently a copyright violation of e
9.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
"training data is totally a violation of copyright" This really isn't clear because cognition is treated as a special exception to copyright. Every thought we have is derivative of everything we've seen before to some de
10.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
It is a factor, even if not taken into account in their analysis. At 64, someone might be compelled by the court to work. This can't happen at 65+ 65 is retirement. Everyone's income drops around this time.
11.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
> That's a pretty drastic drop, with no explanation (in this article) It's because spousal support terminates at 65. At that point both parties are presumed retired and can't be compelled to work. > Mr Vandenbroucke sai
12.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
Going to an ER after taking cannabis seems like something only someone with an existing anxiety disorder might do. A more accurate headline might read: People with anxiety disorders who take cannabis may unnecessarily visit the ER.
13.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
Nah. The Amiga 1200 debuted in 1992 for $600. 2MB RAM and a 14Mhz 68020. No monitor. In 1992 you could get a 486dx 33MHz with 4MB for like $800 (a two year old chip) with similar peripherals. Way more than double the power for a marginal in
14.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
The Amiga was dead a few years before Win95. The VGA chipset and the soundblaster killed the Amiga. In the late 1980s I wanted an Amiga so badly. But by the early 90s I had a 486 with VGA and a sb16 and it was all over. The Amiga had a mere
15.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
I've used the LG frontloaders. They are not effective at removing muddy stains. They simply can't do the job. Wirecutter doesn't publish their methodology, but every "tester" who has focuses on questionable metrics
16.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
I've used both a top loader (currently a speed queen) and a front loader washer each for more than a decade. I have many t-shirts that are 20+ years old. Any wear from the washer seems negligible in comparison to the wear from actually
17.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
The $5-$10k mark for a high end home workstation has held pretty firm since the 1980s. That's the buy-in price point for a very early PC, an SGI Indy, a low end Sun workstation, etc. We went through an amazing period of very cheap comp
18.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
If you read what Yann writes you'll pretty quickly see that he's rather ignorant about AI. His opinion is probably worse on average than the typical technical generalist's
19.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
Yes, as your article clearly explains the problem we are discussing - heat pollution - does not exist there. The article is talking about salinity, not heat.
20.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
The common place to use something like this would be to mmap an existing external data structure. There are a number of existing mmap-able 0copy k/v library/db formats that fit the bill here.
21.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
It's a good thing the problem we're talking about doesn't exist there
22.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
I think you are probably shower and bathe in water that flows through pipes, so it seems absurd to be concerned about the same water/pipe combination used elsewhere. If you don't shower or bathe or use modern plumbing infrastructu
23.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
Well, it would be an invalid assumption. The pipes are just pipes. There are no chemicals. Do you also avoid touching water from your kitchen sink? Your bathroom shower?
24.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
It's usually a silly complaint, though. The change is to a small area, and small areas are naturally different temperatures for all sorts of different reasons. Dredging the beach and changing the water elevation will have similar tempe
25.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
> It is It is not, as explained by your own link. You should read your own link. Registering makes it enormously easier and nearly everyone will register prior to bringing a suit, but it is absolutely not required -- again, as your link
26.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
No, that's not correct. Registering helps in establishing ownership but it is NOT necessary to bring a suit. Even more importantly, the vast majority of copyright claims aren't litigated in a court at all. Most are handled by extr
27.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
> Any serious entrepreneur wouldn't fall on the default to begin with if the potential losses are that large. Huh? It's no change at all for someone who wants to retain copyright. They would just need to file to register. >
28.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
No, this isn't true at all. Because everything is presumably under copyright already we already have such a database. It's simply "everything" The difference here is that the vast majority of works would suddenly be free
29.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
> What really improves here? With affirmative registration we can trivially prove/disprove whether a specific work is registered under copyright. It also greatly expands the works in the public domain. > It doesn't even bene
30.
by throwaway09223 3y ago
> Thing is most people won't even think to apply. Good. As intended.

More ›