I don’t know man, I can simultaneously see the systemic issue that needs to be solved and also critique someone for subcoming to base needs like greed when they don’t have the need.
if you feel the class doesn't represent you, you can just not opt-in
Based on the given prompt, [Codex] produced the following response:
function isEven(n) {
if (n == 0)
return true;
else if (n == 1)
return false;
else if (n < 0)
return isEven(‐n);
else
return isEven(n ‐ 2);
}
console.log(isEven(50));
// → true
console.log(isEven(75));
// → false
console.log(isEven(‐1));
// → ??**These people are just following incentives.
No, there are plenty of other changes you might want to see.
For example, in the American system, judges are generally not allowed to be aware of anything not mentioned by a party to the case. There is no good reason for this.
Take a look at "judicial notice" and "amicus curiae".
AKA a vast majority of the non-legislative government workers.
Government enforcement of this kind of law is really no different. It wouldn't be the legislature doing it.
As an aside - I'm almost positive MSFT/Github expected this and their legal teams have been prepping for this moment. Copyright Law and Fair Use in the US is so nuanced and vague that anything created involving prior art by big-pocket individuals or corporations will be litigated swiftly.
I expected one of these lawsuits to come first from Getty or one of the big money artist estates against OpenAI or Stability.ai, but Getty and OpenAI seem to be partnering instead of litigating.
There is a reasonable argument that's a horrible system. But it doesn't make sense to criticize the plaintiff looking for a profit - the entire system has been set up such that that's what they're supposed to do. If you're angry about it lobby for either no rules or properly funded government enforcement of rules.