This toggle allows you to opt out of having profiling used for future decisions that produce legal or similarly significant effects about you.

The what now?

This sounds strangely ominous.

I too prefer spending less money for a better experience.

I’m pretty sure the Ukrainians will cease firing once the Russians leave their country and stop trying to murder them.

And it hasn’t been tested because researching the “best” method for executing humans is abhorrent and the scientific and medical communities have ethical standards.

But the State of Alabama doesn’t, a feature it shares with other regimes responsible for the worst atrocities in history.

Unless they’re really into arts and crafts, there’s no good reason for a home user to buy an inkjet anymore.

If every once in a while they want a nice photo print or to print up some flyers in color or something, it’s cheaper and less overall hassle to just pay per page at a drug store or office store on those occasions.

You might have a point there. Maybe… just maybe… this Musk fellow is completely full of shit about most things he says.

I agree with this in principle, but the way they were allowed to compete as the “Russian Olympic Committee” was bullshit. You can’t have a team called “totally not Russia (wink)” and expect that to be a meaningful punishment for the nations leaders

I think the athletes should only be able to compete as citizens of the world with no reference or acknowledgement of the banned country allowed.

Yes, but it’s not an automatic invocation of WW3. Article 5 just requires the members to discuss the issue and decide what to do about it, which is what they’re doing now. If there’s consensus Russia did it, they’ll do something proportional in response.

Yup, a friend recommended them to me and I’m really happy with them. I haven’t quite gotten the hang of gauging my own speaking volume when I have them in at a loud bar or something but I’ll figure it out with more practice.

Yes, this is totally a symbolic move and nothing has meaningfully changed at Unity. Riccitiello is probably walking away with many millions of dollars and the rest of the leadership team who were fully onboard with the new licensing plan are still there. Once the negative press dies down, Unity will try something equally shitty again.

Developers would be foolish to trust this company ever again.

Usually not, but I finally live somewhere with an Alamo nearby and those are a nice experience and they enforce good behavior. We don’t see a lot of movies in the theater, but when we do, that’s where we go and we’ve been going more often as a result.

I also find that a lot of theatres are too loud now, but maybe my ears are getting old.

I do too and I’ve probably damaged my hearing in my youth by being careless & invincible. I bought a set of fancy concert earplugs ($30ish) that protect hearing without muffling the sound and they were well worth it. They fit in a little capsule on my keychain so I’ve got them if I wind up someplace unexpectedly loud.

So is fish sauce, miso paste, yaggi, marmite, better than bouillon, parmesan, mushrooms, tomato paste and many many more things.

And anytime you see hydrolyzed soy or wheat protein on an ingredient label… that’s just slightly less refined MSG.

If you’d rather avoid liquid smoke try using smoked paprika instead. Store bought does the job but if you can find the good stuff at a local farmer’s market, it’s worth it.

For a minute there I thought this was going to be about a nuclear aircraft. That’s some wild 1950s shit right there.

An increasing number of restaurants are pulling exactly this sort of bullshit–little 3.5% fees at the bottom of the total check disclosed only in fine print on the menu (if at all) tied to COVID, paying their staff, processing credit cards, etc. It needs to end. Pricing should be upfront so customers can compare what they’re actually paying, not snuck in at the end.

I’m seeing it more and more. Little “processing fees” here and there, some tied to COVID, some tied to credit cards. There needs to be a clap-back against this behavior.

My bet is: it’s going to depend on a case by case basis.

Almost certainly. Getty images has several exhibits in its suit against Stable Diffusion showing the Getty watermark popping up in its output as well as several images that are substantially the same as their sources. Other generative models don’t produce anything all that similar to the source material, so we’re probably going to wind up with lots of completely different and likely contradictory rulings on the matter before this gets anywhere near being sorted out legally.

Copyright laws are not necessarily wrong; just remove the “until author’s death plus 70 years” coverage, go back to a more reasonable “4 years since publication”, and they make much more sense.

The trouble with that line of thinking is that the laws are under no obligation to make sense. And the people who write and litigate those laws benefit from making them as complicated and irrational as they can get away with.

Not a single original sentence of the original work is retained in the model.

Which is why I find it interesting that none of the court cases (as far as I’m aware) are challenging whether an LLM is copying anything in the first place. Granted, that’s the plaintiff’s job to prove, but there’s no need to raise a fair use defense at all if no copying occurred.

Clearly transformative only applies to the work a human has put in to the process. It isn’t at all clear that an LLM would pass muster for a fair use defense, but there are court cases in progress that may try to answer that question. Ultimately, I think what it’s going to come down to is whether the training process itself and the human effort involved in training the model on copyrighted data is considered transformative enough to be fair use, or doesn’t constitute copying at all. As far as I know, none of the big cases are trying the “not a copy” defense, so we’ll have to see how this all plays out.

In any event, copyright laws are horrifically behind the times and it’s going to take new legislation sooner or later.