@Mistral@lemmings.world How are you feeling about yourself?

Ahh. TV shows before everything became political. Just two guys hating each other for very silly reasons completely unconnected to anything on earth.

What happened to the number of new apartments being created?

High taxes would potentially push more costs on renters.

Potentially, but I think here not so much. Competition drives prices down. In a perfectly competitive market, prices are pretty much equal to the cost of production. In that case, any tax would be completely passed on to the customer. But you can’t produce land at a certain location. My guess is that rents are largely determined by willingness to pay.

Why would you need a law to make someone sell to the highest bidder?

Don’t feed my pedantic nerd rage.

“Living”?

It’s not clear if this is piracy. In the US, it’s obviously an ongoing fight. Basically, what you describe is “books3”, put together with scripts by Aaron Swartz.

It’s legal in Japan, if the purpose is only AI training and not enjoyment. I’m not sure if there are issues regarding DRM or such.

In the EU, the dataset and resulting model would be illegal. Any business offering the model would be in hot water, but I think internal use would be fine.

This too shall pass.

It probably says somewhere where you dled the model. It’s also in the metadata. I forget where it’s displayed. Maybe in the terminal window.

Things you should know:

• What a token is depends on the model.
• Context takes a lot of (V)RAM.
• People modify models to increase the context but that often doesn’t work well. Watch out for the model missing things, esp. in the middle of the document.

L3 is probably not the right base for the task. Maybe Phi-3 or Cohere.

Yes, better tools to analyze data will yield great results. Even a good push to scan all those finds and make all the data available would probably allow amazing new discoveries. The catch is that people like to hoard that data and milk it for their own careers and fame.

That said… LLM is Large Language Model. By definition, LLMs are unlikely to analyze 3-dimensional shapes. The newer AIs, like Gemini or GPT-4o, also use vision and audio but they are often still called (multimodal) LLMs. It’s justifiable as they still seem to have language at the core, but it’s getting increasingly dubious.

Not exactly ancestors, as others have said.

DNA doesn’t last nearly long enough. Scientists have made great strides in analyzing ancient DNA (aDNA), They have decoded the genomes of Neanderthals and other extinct human species. But that aDNA is only tens of thousands of years old. IIRC the theoretical maximum is something like 1 million years. No chance on dinosaur DNA.

As to how what evidence there is, I think that’s already sufficiently answered, and better than I could.

You (in certain cases your employer) own the copyright to your creations. It’s your intellectual property. By adding a license, you give others permission to use your property. That’s just good old capitalism.

Your property rights aren’t without limit, though. What exactly those are depends on jurisdiction, but you probably can’t stop others from archiving your site for their own purposes.

The creator is the automatic copyright owner, or in some cases their employer. Copyright is automatic through international treaties like the Berne convention. The Berne convention is from the 19th century and was created by the authoritarian european empires of the time. The US joined only in 1989. I think your question shows that the idea has not fully taken hold of the public consciousness. Automatic copyright is now the global norm. (I always wonder how much its better copyright laws helped the US copyright industry to become globally dominant.)

Very short and/or simple texts are not copyrighted. IE they are public domain.

Adding a license statement gives others the right to use these posts accordingly. It only serves to give away rights but is not necessary to retain them. The real tricky question is the status of the other posts. I’d guess most jurisdictions have something like the concept of an implied license. Given how fanatical some lemmy users are on intellectual property, not having it in writing is really asking for trouble, though.

What such a license means for AI training is hard to say at this point. The right-wing tradition of EU copyright law gives owners much power. They can use a machine-readable opt-out. Whether such a notice qualifies is questionable. However, there is no standard for such a machine-readable opt-out, so who knows?

US copyright has a more left-wing tradition and is constitutionally limited to certain purposes. It’s unlikely that such a notice has any effect.

Other country presidents are accepted though.

There’s the trick. Chose a small country, where the president is less busy and not as well guarded. I’d turn into an iceland pony. Scratch a message into the ground and the president will be around shortly; nice photo op for the tourists. There’s enough people there who speak english. Alternatively, Ireland would be a good pick if you want to be sure they speak english.

Not saying you’re wrong, but it’s a bit late for that. EG Facebook, Inc. v. Power Ventures, Inc. was decided in 2009. We can only hope that these mistakes are not repeated.

I don’t understand why people here are so gung-ho on intellectual property. It doesn’t fit with the values that are otherwise espoused here and I worry that it indicates a more general rightward shift in economic policy preference.

Copyright preemption is a long-standing legal doctrine. Congress makes copyright laws. State law and contract law has to give way.

They can still use EU law to extract money, just not as much.

I don’t think it’s entirely clear what effect a login-wall would have. Facebook has been quite successful with that technique in the past. So there are some precedents. But I think today there is more understanding for the harmful effects these had.

I’m not sure where to start here. Privacy and copyright aren’t the same thing.

I never claimed it was. In fact, I pointed out the implied contradiction. If you could point out what gave you the false impression, I can hopefully be more clear in the future.

This post kinda shows the problem I have with the GDPR. It creates this pseudo property right in information about yourself. It’s not about a right to privacy but about Data Protection; rhymes with copyright protection. GDPR fans are worried about “their data” being “stolen”, not about being spied on. It’s about property.

It’s not something that has traditionally existed. People always gossiped; maybe had a little black book. That’s still allowed, because the GDPR has an exemption for that. Strictly, it’s a violation of other’s rights.

Privacy means that some areas of life are simply off-limits. For example, you mustn’t read other people’s mail. The GDPR isn’t concerned with that. In fact, there is an implied contradiction. GDPR rights are concerned with controlling the storage and exchange of information as an intellectual property. Enforcing that requires surveillance of communication. Only the exemptions prevent that from being an issue.

No right exists in isolation. You mentioned the right to bodily integrity. What if someone is injured and needs medical care. Maybe they need surgery or they lose a limb, but they can’t pay the surgery. You’d have to take someone else’s money; their property. Even in the US, this is done to some degree. Your argument about rights being “sacrosanct” is against that. If you can’t take someone’s precious data, then certainly not their money either.

Something about the GDPR turns people into right libertarians / conservatives /neoliberals. Call it what you will. It’s: Fuck you, I got mine. It’s not about what’s best for everyone, society, human progress, or anything beyond the individual.

artificial intelligence noun

1 : the capability of computer systems or algorithms to imitate intelligent human behavior

also, plural artificial intelligences : a computer, computer system, or set of algorithms having this capability

2 : a branch of computer science dealing with the simulation of intelligent behavior in computers

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/artificial intelligence