It was meant to protect creators ability to earn from what they produce for a while so that they would be encouraged to create and share with the world.
I think we both agree that the current copyright regime is not doing this. But I fail to see how expanding the rights of rightsholders to dictate how you use the works that you have acquired (which is what this suite is over) doesnt just make that issue worse. I would much prefer to see copyrights drastically slashed from the absurd semi-perpetual system that the USA has pushed on the world and things move into the public realm after a decade or two, without doing that giving people who inherited or bought the rights over a work completed a centrury ago the legal power to say "you cannot read this work in a way we dont like" is abhorent.
The bit that picture leave out is that first guy is almost certainly killed, as are a good few of those in the third panel. Thats what makes it difficult.
Just so we're clear, the problem is that people are driven to suicide because of draconian punishment of copyright infringment, not that it isnt happening to people we dont like. Right?
For all those cheering on the copyright mafia going after Anthropic, consider that some of the groups supporting anthropic against this massive overreach of "we get to decide how you use our works" include:
Its an urban planning and transport issue essentially. Medium density housing (think 4-6 story blocks) allows enough people to live in an area that it becomes feasible to have trams/light rail serving that area.
You're right that there's orders of magnitude difference, but its the driving that's far more! One query to a chatGPT type model uses roughly 1Wh of energy, which is about the same as is released in burning one droplet of gasoline.
No I'm a meat eater who is anti-car! I'm more getting at how people have latched on to the energy use of AI models without realising the huge energy usage that goes into their daily lives.
Yeah, I too hate those hypcrites who complain about the massive environmental impact of AI, then drive a 10 mile round trip to buy a burger made from a cow raised on soy.
Just FYI, this use of republic is not recognised in political science and as far as I've seen is only used by americans justifying why their system is undemocratic. Republic just comes from "res Publica" (public affair) and means the head of state is not a monarch but a member of the public. There are very democratic republics like Finland and there are very undemocratic republics like the PRC. The way you describe a republic would apply to countries like the UK or Sweden, which are constitutional monarchies, not republics.
Representative democracy is a better term for what you are talking about, where the population elects representatives who are able to advocate for them and take the time to become subject matter experts on running the country (idealy).
I dont think AI has much to do with them dropping the greenwashing, it's kissing the ring to Trump. If Harris had won they would still be going just as hard on AI but trying harder to keep the green messaging going.
If the tax is on fuel then it wouldnt matter where they are registered, they'd be getting refueled in the EU and so would pay the tax.
wouldn't this result in airlines dumping the extra cost on customers
yes, partially. If the increase in tax results in a particular flight being £50 more expensive for example they will rise prices by an amount. But it likely wont be the full 50 as airlines are already charging what they think the optimum price is, the price going up is likely to result in less sales.
It also incentivises the airlines to be more fuel efficient (and so less damaging to the climate), and punishes worse offenders like private jets more as the use more fuel per passenger mile.
The most annoying thing is there is a trivial to implement way to close to halve these stupidly inflated sizes: make the highest resolution of textures a free DLC that you optionally install
Yes, i find it difficult to believe that they mess up a dozen line algo that is in their training set in a prominant place with no complicating factors. Despite what a lot of people here think, LLMs do have value for coding. Even if the companies selling them make ridiculous claims about what they can do.
I mean, they already are, just for recruitment to the army rather than factories. There's plenty of stories of people being rounded up by police, put on trumped up charges and being given the option of jail and abuse there or signing up to go to the front line.
I find that very difficult to believe. If for no other reason that there is an implementation in the wiki page for Levenshtein distance (and wiki is known to be very prominant in the training sets used for foundational models), and that trying it just now and it gave a perfectly functional implementation.
I think we both agree that the current copyright regime is not doing this. But I fail to see how expanding the rights of rightsholders to dictate how you use the works that you have acquired (which is what this suite is over) doesnt just make that issue worse. I would much prefer to see copyrights drastically slashed from the absurd semi-perpetual system that the USA has pushed on the world and things move into the public realm after a decade or two, without doing that giving people who inherited or bought the rights over a work completed a centrury ago the legal power to say "you cannot read this work in a way we dont like" is abhorent.