Definitely one of the most impactful music videos I’ve seen, this is why I know who Gesaffelstein is

Yes, I once lived in an apartment where the dryer would sometimes snag my clothes on the edge of the spinning part and they would get these spots at the point where they got caught that were stained black and stretched out or ripped.

Anyone tried it? How is it

Not that you in any way have to, but to me the simplest thing that gives off non-AI vibes for a comic is if the text is in a less common font, because AI comics basically always have the same font.

I feel like there are also other potential reasons to want to publish software anonymously though, even if monetization is not the goal. For instance, to keep it game related, there have been plenty of noncommercial fan projects that get shut down mainly just because the companies that own the IP are run by assholes.

This seems like a good idea, but a related question I’ve been wondering about is, what is the best way to anonymously run a software project facing this type of threat model, when you also want that software to be accessible to people? Does anyone know about any tips or resources for this? Is there some kind of darknet github? How do you do social media or collect donations/payment? Also, are there any good examples of projects that did this right?

What features would people expect/want such software to have?

I’m trying to figure out whether this is a felony or not under the notorious CFAA

In practice, any ordinary computer has come under the jurisdiction of the law, including cellphones, due to the interstate nature of most Internet communication.

Maybe it depends on whether those speakers are only bluetooth or somehow internet connected?

The idea of a “documentation moat” seems really gross to me. Like you’re going to make it more difficult on purpose for people to interact with your software, unless they pay?

Yeah but I sympathize, the way money rules your life and how you’re allowed to live it is brutal and it’s only natural to dream of overcoming that through financial success.

Aren’t they quitting the consumer market and only making stuff for companies now? Unfortunately I don’t think a boycott will affect them, would definitely need some other consequences.

Bloat is a valid concern but imo a lesser one compared to the potential for centralized data harvesting.

That’s what you’d think is being implied, but it’s a lawyer so who knows if this is the case

We can’t afford to make any of this. We don’t have the money for the compute required or to pay for the lawyers to make the law work for us

I don’t think this is entirely true; yeah, large foundational models have training costs that are beyond the reach of individuals, but plenty can be done that is not, or can be done by a relatively small organization. I can’t find a direct price estimate for Apertus, and it looks like they used their own hardware, but it’s mentioned they used ten million gpu hours, and GH200 gpus; I found a source online claiming a rental cost of $1.50 per hour for that hardware, so I think the cost of training this could be loosely estimated to be something around 20 million dollars.

That is a lot of money if you are one person, but it’s an order of magnitude smaller than the settlements of billions of dollars being paid so far by the biggest AI companies for their hasty unauthorized use of copyrighted materials. It’s easy to see how copyright and legal costs could potentially be the bottleneck here preventing smaller actors from participating.

It should benefit the people, so it needs to change. It needs to be “expanded” (I wouldn’t call it that, rather “modified” but I’ll use your word) in that it currently only protects the wealthy and binds the poor. It should be the opposite.

How would that even work though? Yes, copyright currently favors the wealthy, but that’s because the whole concept of applying property rights to ideas inherently favors the wealthy. I can’t imagine how it could be the opposite even in theory, but in practice, it seems clear that any legislation codifying limitations on use and compensation for AI training will be drafted by lobbyists of large corporate rightsholders, at the obvious expense of everyone with an interest in free public ownership and use of AI technology.

But we can’t afford to pay. I don’t think open models like the one in the OP article would be developed and released for free to the public if there was a complex process of paying billions of dollars to rightsholders in order to do so. That sort of model would favor a monopoly of centralized services run only by the biggest companies.

Wasn’t my choice to end it, but working out did help, the physical discomfort dulls the emotional pain. Although I did it at home rather than going to a gym. Years later I’m still more in shape than I was before that episode.

Barring civilians from using encryption and software deemed dangerous is a new level imo. These are the tools we have to fight this stuff, maintaining those rights is a big deal.

The ruling came after the cities of Sedro Woolley and Stanwood sued Jose Rodriguez in civil court to block his records requests. Both cities have since turned off their Flock camera systems.

Great outcome

No caffeine multiple days in a row. I often enjoy it, and I don’t think it’s really that bad for you, but I don’t like the way it adjusts my personality and state of mind if that makes sense and it’s easy to get addicted enough to start feeling like crap if you don’t have any.

And paid for by implied government subsidies even