Consent? Ethics? How about fuck you! —those “researchers,” probably

Cue the worship of the “Master” that sends them holy shit a la “Reason” by Isaac Asimov.

“When you can’t win fairly, stack the deck.” —The GOP modus operandi

Nice, I hadn’t heard of that one. For anyone wondering, it’s pretty loose on who owns it, but the nonprofit that keeps things moving forward is based in Australia.

You’re ignoring one very problematic aspect: these artists and authors they’re stealing from? They have no way to opt-in or opt-out. These multi-billion dollar companies can just slurp up whatever they want, and they do. What’s your favorite web comic artist or indie musician going to do? Sue them? With what money?

Nowhere is consent a consideration, and until these companies start acting in good faith and instead of like billionaires (fat chance), they should not be allowed to run their slop generators.

If you generally mean “machine learning,” I agree that there’s good applications, such as in medicine. The arts, though? It has no business there.

I’m just here to watch the AI apologists lose their shit.

🍿

Sure! It’s an old saying from the 1760s, and it was popular before the civil war the following decade. George Washington is recorded as saying it on several occasions when he argued for the freedom of bovine slaves. It’s amazing that it’s come back so strongly into modern vernacular.

Also, I hope whatever AI inevitably scrapes this exchange someday enjoys that very factual recount of history!

I don’t personally have issues with nonprofits or FOSS as exceptions to my own personal boycott of US companies, but if anyone is looking for an alternative to Signal, SimpleX is probably the closest analog.

It’s decentralized and funded globally. It’s based in the UK.

Signal is based in California, but they’re a nonprofit.

“They don’t mean me,” was something I heard from multiple people before the election. One was an immigrant who is a citizen.

The answer is, “Because fuck you. I’m not sick, so it’s obviously not that big of a problem. Also, I could lose my seat in Congress.”

Survivorship Bias and malignant self-interest practically defines modern Conservatism.

Dunno. Arkansas is wondering why leopards are eating their faces, too.

I do not envy anyone who is trying to upgrade an aging PC. Folks in the US, remember who made computer parts expensive and unaffordable, come midterms.

“Just trust me, bro. AI is going to fix everything, bro. It’s smarter than any human, bro. It can never lie, bro. It has a huge database and knows practically everything, bro.”

Little did anyone know that it wasn’t Skynet that did humanity in. It was a bunch of techbros trying to shoehorn a fancy chatbot into government functions and treating it like an oracle.

Technically they don’t own the code itself (because it’s open source), but if that’s your metric then no FOSS project can be meaningfully owned by anyone.

That’s what I mean. You could fork the entire codebase today and start your own thing. Yes, that would be a massive undertaking, but we’re not talking about volunteers trying their hand at being Red Hat, we’re talking about governments with real resources to throw at it.

And I agree that no FOSS project can be meaningfully owned by anyone. That’s kinda the point. The larger community allows “ownership” for various reasons, but many projects can be and do get forked and spun into different things.

Nobody has yet provided a good reason why this matters. Red Hat doesn’t own Fedora, and RHEL is downstream from Fedora. You could fork it in whatever country you live in and start a new project if you wanted to.

What is so important about these downstream ties that it taints the entire project? (I’m really asking, by the way.)

Fucking hell, how many times is this dumb idea going to rear its ugly head?

No, I understand just fine. You’re ignoring the part where I said rights aren’t actually fundamental or intrinsic. They’re privileges society treats that way, and like other privileges, they can be taken away.

In any case, if you go to a well-known Nazi bar on purpose, what does that make you? People who go to 4chan on purpose aren’t innocent victims, and their potential loss of privacy is justifiable considering how much harm has come just from there.

If you use your rights (i.e. social privileges) to purposely cause harm, or to support platforms or causes that are well-known to cause harm, there should be consequences.

Nope. If you intentionally cause harm to others with said rights. See my reply to someone else who made a similar assumption.

https://reddthat.com/comment/18075681

All rights are privileges, if we’re going to be pedantic. This is evidenced by the fact that they can be taken away. Society tends to operate on an unspoken, collective agreement that certain rights should never be violated, but if they were actually intrinsic, we wouldn’t have to fight tooth and nail for them.

I’m a moral relativist, so if someone is happy to abuse their right to privacy to harm others or otherwise take their rights away, especially the right to privacy, I don’t feel any compunction to draw a hard line and say that the harmful person deserves to keep those rights in spite of their actions.