ls does 90% of this stuff already, so why not just add the options to it?

looks at readme

eza: A modern, maintained replacement for ls.

ls is maintained so what do they mean? “Modern”?

looks at code tab

Oh! It’s another person thinking the world needs to be written in Rust.

Sdxl was 3 models too. Base, refiner and vae.

Cascade is 3. Lores, hires, vae.

69 MJ is 19.17 kWh. About 86p of electricity at today’s wholesale price in the UK (£45/MWh: today is fairly average).

The research they are doing is great, but there’s so much engineering to be done to turn fusion into something practical; something capable of running streams of pulses, not just single ones.

This was the last experiment for this reactor running it outside of design limits.

The trained model is a work derived from masses of copywrite material. Distribution of that model is infringement, same as distributing copies of movies. Public access to that model is infringement, just as a public screening of a movie is.

People keep thinking it’s “the picture the AI drew” that’s the issue. They’re wrong. It’s the “AI” itself.

What do you think the trained model is other than a derived work?

Promotional images are still under copyright.

AI is creating an image based on someone else’s property. The difference is it’s owned by a corporation.

This isn’t the issue. The copyright infringement is the creation of the model using the copywrite work as training data.

All NYT is doing is demonstrating that the model must have been created using copywrite works, and hence infringement has taken place. They are not stating that the model is committing an infringement itself.

They are showing that the author of the tool has comitted massive copyright infringement in the process construction of the tool.

…unless they licensed all the copyright works they trained the model on. (Hint: they didn’t, and we know they didn’t because the copyright holders haven’t licensed their work for that purpose. )

It doesn’t matter if a company charges or not for anything. It’s not a factor in copyright law.

Copyleft is not public domain, and requires copyright law to function.

The article uses Midjourney. Nobody is tuning it.

…and that’s why the person you originally replied to asked their question. General popularity is generally a bad proxy metric for personal preference.

Is it impossible to like things outside the mainstream?

I think it’s more that people confuse the Israeli government with “the Jewish people”, when the truth is that they are very separate. The Israeli people are somewhere in the middle. There seems to be a bunch of them who are quite supportive of their government’s actions.

Also libretube (android client to piped.video so you don’t connect to YouTube at all) and clipious (android client to invidious) are worth looking at too. You’ll need to tweak the servers you connect to to get good performance, but both work quite nicely.

There’s certainly a bubble bursting. You only have to look at all the layoffs.fyi since COVID. I’m just hoping it’s happening in a slow enough way that it’s not going to take more legitimate companies with it.

AI is the next bubble. It will hit a brick wall either legally or just on functionality (maybe both). I can see uses for targeted models, bespoke to a use case, but training those is too expensive right now. General models are just toys IMHO. Unfortunately it’s going to get a few years for everyone to realise.

Facebook opening up to non-students was the turning point IMHO. Myspace was big, but everybody knew it was trash so not being on it was fine. If you wanted “a profile” otherwise, you needed your own page. That took effort, so only people with something to say bothered with it. Even Twitter was still SMS based and so only for hardcore addicts.

Facebook gave everyone an effortless voice and lordy, do people talk crap.

Would have been a better joke without the “all”. Then the meaning is ambiguous.

If fair use is cut down…

It’s not a case of cutting down fair use. It’s a case 9f enforcing current fair use limits.

The choices here are to respect copyright or destroy it. Having and AI exception is nonsense.

"I’m not illegally downloading the latest blockbuster/ best seller / chart topping album. I’m scraping the internet for training data for my AI. It just so happens I need to filter the data by hand before it can injest it. I keep looking for suitable data, but haven’t identified any yet. "

There’s plenty of non copyright material out there to do research on. It won’t make for useful AI products, but they can start licensing for that.

A corrollary to what you’re saying is that people assume that because you’ve replied to them, you must be disagreeing with them. Often I’ll agree with a poster but comment to add to their point, only to get chewed out for disagreeing with them when I didn’t.