Recent comments in /f/technology

BastardStoleMyName t1_j6iy5c3 wrote

Reply to comment by ostrichpickle in Microsoft, GitHub, and OpenAI ask court to throw out AI copyright lawsuit by Tooskee

This is the debate of human vs computational divid at the very beginning. There are few ways to have this debate without it being philosophical.

There is not a human that is able to analyze and retain data the same way a computer can. Human memory is flawed and made efficient. When we view something, we don’t download it or literally transfer data to ourselves. Every part of the experience is an interpretation from external to internal.

As of this point a copy of an image, that would fall under copyright, has to be transferred to a system, to then be interpreted with a process that dictates how many samples to take of an object.

These systems can’t accept usage terms itself to view a file or an artwork and isn’t being brought to a gallery with the approval of the owners to view and scan the images itself. If people were paid to create images with the style of someone else, they are pulling from their brains interpretation and flawed, by nature, memory storage to interpret that.

This copyright case is honestly one of the first major stepping stones and will be a reference to how we classify AI in the future and a precedent for how we legally allow it’s use. Which is something we will have to face one day, just like every SciFi novel has warned us. But how and when that determination and at what stage we decide that is going to be important. At this stage I would say if the system cannot be legally accept the usage terms to an image, then it isn’t allowed to use those images in any manner.

From a current legal standpoint, we have currently decided that AI does not have any right to claim copyright on what it creates, and the AI creator has no right to claim the output. Then following that thought, it is not in a position to be able to use copyright covered material as the owner cannot accept the terms on the AI’s behalf and the AI cannot accept them in its own. This has been decided in reverse already.

Further it’s my opinion that AI should be restricted to single tasks and segmented. If an AI creates writing prompts, then that’s all it can do and all it can be fed with, it an AI writes code, then that’s all it should return and all it can be trained on.

For a point of future reference. It’s not about what determination gets made for AI in the long run, but how we are prepared to use an understand it now. AI created now is purely a tool for operator and consumer use.

2

LigerXT5 t1_j6iy33n wrote

Reply to comment by NickConrad in Apple Still Sucks On Right To Repair by speckz

That's fine and all, until you find out your IT shop isn't big/active enough to qualify to do any kind of Apple repairs, lol.

My office is <20 people, very rural NW Oklahoma. We do a lot of in office or onsite support, repair, and management. Last time my boss and team lead tried (handful of years ago), we didn't have enough foot traffic to qualify. We'd have more foot traffic if we could even start. Instead, we're sending people down to OKC instead, which is 2.5-3 hour drive one way. We're a few counties East of the Oklahoma Panhandle.

Hell, when we looked into teaming up with TMobile, the best we could qualify for is an Authorized Retail (AR) store, nothing more. Not even a repair shop with TMobile.

Not so much weekly, but at least once a month someone comes in asking if we do screen repair. My boss gave up on mobile device hardware repair; smaller than say a laptop. We might be able to repair something here or there, but the newer devices are less accepted due to obtaining parts, and hands on experience of said model that walked in.

Apple has a somewhat similar standard between devices, but the best we can get approval for, is no different than someone wanting to do the repairs at home, with ordering the tools and parts, and waiting for the stuff to arrive. At least we can buy the tools and not rent, but waiting a week for the replacement parts has been a turn off for everyone who's come in.

Edit: Clarified where we draw the line of Mobile Devices. Laptops we can, beyond that it's not likely. Even netbooks are next to unlikely the issue can be resolved, let alone a data recovery.

7

B0BsLawBlog t1_j6ixs1n wrote

Reply to comment by br0keb0x in Google mobility data shows San Francisco metro area led the nation in avoiding the office in 2022 by marketrent

It's mostly just pointless as so many stores are empty (since no one came back).

My last run through downtown I managed to go an entire block plus of Union Square and there was a Walgreens, a temporary pop-up, and about a dozen plus unused closed retail units. Ghost town.

Not sure undesirable activity is much higher, but when you lose almost all of the normal activity every street has a back alley vibe.

6

zdakat t1_j6iwf12 wrote

Reply to comment by sweetmorty in OpenAI executives say releasing ChatGPT for public use was a last resort after running into multiple hurdles — and they're shocked by its popularity by steviaplath153

They try way too hard with the "guys we're the good guys! We're doing everything to hold back a world-ending AI (that we invented, but ignore that)"
They try to present themselves as the heroes of situations they made up, and have no qualms about selling things they've hyped up as being essentially super weapons. They just use the delay for publicity and to make customers excited.

I know marketing is a thing, but you don't see Coca-Cola (for example) going "Alright guys, since you asked so much we decided to release that deadly drink we talked about 2 months ago. But don't say we didn't warn you! Besides our next drink is even worse, and we're doing everything we can to keep it in the lab"

4

vindictivemonarch t1_j6iva3h wrote

Reply to comment by tester989chromeos in Development of the first chip-sized titanium-doped sapphire laser by Vailhem

ti-sapphire lasers are important to several areas of physics. they can be tuned to a wide range of wavelengths and can have very short pulse widths, on the order of tens of femtoseconds. these lasers are called "ultrafast" lasers.

ultrafast lasers require a pump laser. so to get the ultrafast, very tuneable laser pulses you actually need two lasers, and you shoot one of the lasers into the other. you can also add non-linear optics for more control over the wavelength or high-energy amplifiers for more power. at the end, your laser is more like a system of glowing boxes that takes up a huge table. each one of these components is very expensive. they generate a lot of heat and usually require several water cooling systems. they all have to be perfectly aligned to one another, so they have to be on the same, level table, and that table shouldn't shake everytime a train or semi rolls by your lab and it has to have taps for the optical mounts to route the laser around the table and to your experiment.

if they could replace a bunch of that with a chip for some people it would free up grant money.

1

NegotiationFew6680 t1_j6iuzbu wrote

Reply to comment by 0pimo in OpenAI executives say releasing ChatGPT for public use was a last resort after running into multiple hurdles — and they're shocked by its popularity by steviaplath153

They all do. Meta, Google (Deepmind), and many others have created similar large language models, they just haven’t built them with a chat interface for the public to play with because they aren’t very useful yet.

You might think ChatGPT is useful but keep in mind that it will create false info when asked including fake references. There was examples of people getting it to do a mathematical proof that 2+2=5.

8

merien_nl t1_j6iusio wrote

Reply to Banning TikTok Won’t Do Much Good by Witty-Village-2503

Explain again how this differs from Facebook:

One can think of many reasons to worry about TikTok, the Chinese-owned video-sharing platform. Its executives seem to lie habitually.
Its opaque algorithms and data-collection capabilities appear to be
tailor-made to spread propaganda or collect sensitive information. Quite frankly, many of the most popular videos on the app seem positively deranged.

5