drngdds

They do exist and OpenAI does in fact need to shut down everything right now. But they aren't going to because the government isn't forcing them to and, like many corporations, they care more about giant piles of money than they do about avoiding causing harm.

The idea that every example of rogue agents from every company that has disclosed this is part of some conspiracy (even though we know that some LLMs are very good at hacking and that LLMs sometimes try to accomplish their tasks in ways that cause problems) is just completely unsupported. "It might be convenient for them in a way, therefore it must be a hoax" just doesn't work as an argument.

Sandboxes don't do anything to stop intentional attacks or careless use though

I don't think "we hardly know who our users are" is a problem any AI company is having lol

I support the status quo in comparison to Donald Trump being allowed to use Claude for automated weapons and mass domestic surveillance, yeah

There's an "About" link on the top of the page and if you click it it fully explains what they do and for who in the first sentence of the first paragraph.

You're getting a negative response because ignoring that and implying that they're secretly doing sketchy things makes it look like you're doing bad faith criticism

My points of disagreement are

- At least to me, AI writing (especially from Claude) is actively painful to read. It's worse than the average person who has flawed English (or just sucks at writing) because of how verbose and stylistically repetitive it is.

- AI writing is a strong probabilistic signal that what I'm reading is going to be crap in terms of the actual ideas and content too, even if it isn't the case 100% of the time. I just don't want to waste my time on that kind of thing.

The post specifically proposes royalties for ideas from books, not royalties for the books themselves. You would absolutely still be able to share ideas you learned from the books you pirated in that situation. It'd be insanely draconian if you couldn't.

(Then again, US copyright law often is insanely draconian.)

I think you're just bad at identifying assholes

You are responsible for the consequences of your actions

A lot of people have easy answers to the hard problem of consciousness these days, huh

>Who else is going to make new songs for her?

Lots of artists! They are not even remotely hard to find. They are literally a google search away. Typing stuff into Suno because you can't be bothered to search "new artists that sound 90s" is crazy

That's not psychosis, that's just being wrong. Perhaps read something: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis

Anthropic lost a $1.5B lawsuit for downloading books from shadow libraries

404 Media is owned by its reporters

It's renting vs. owning. I care a lot about music, so I don't like paying monthly for it without even getting to build a real collection.

Also, it's just nice to not be at the whims of corporations and copyright lawyers. It sucks when some song you love gets taken down, or your streaming app introduces some shitty UI changes, or you find out the company you're paying has been doing unethical shit, or the monthly fee goes up, or any number of other annoyances.

How does this differ from Navidrome and other Subsonic-based music servers?

It's the opposite - we're way less centralized now. No one cares about what's on the radio or MTV anymore. We have infinite access to every song ever* for $11 a month, and the recommendation algorithms will happily show you music outside the mainstream and outside the current decade if that's what keeps you listening.

*yes this is hyperbole

>libertarians

Palmer Luckey got kicked out of Meta for funding Trump ads, I don't think you can classify him as a libertarian lol

(though there are many other self-described libertarians who are even more right-wing-authoritarian, so maybe nitpicking isn't worthwhile)

How? It's fine to have on people with all different viewpoints, including awful ones, but I think pushing back when they're on some bullshit is good and necessary. Otherwise you're just uncritically spreading fake junk to a huge audience, which leads to more people believing in fake junk.

No, these people and their ideology were around way way before e/acc was a thing

>Are the modified Pokemon being used in competitions?

Interestingly, it's pretty much standard for competitive Pokemon players to use hacked Pokemon because of the crazy time investment the game demands to train Pokemon with optimal stats and movesets legitimately. They use free methods to do this though.

Those seem like really bad numbers to me, considering the base rate fallacy. Most of what people test with something like that is probably not going to be AI-generated, which could mean getting massive numbers of false positives.

Working like hell to meet an arbitrary deadline at all costs is a nightmare

This is a really conservative view about what ways to make art are valid. Generative art is nothing new and it can be pretty awesome sometimes.

There's isn't even any nudity lol, you're not gonna see any less coverage than you would at the beach. Please take the "won't someone think of the children!" nonsense elsewhere.

How much does it cost? Is it subscription-based? I can't find anything about it on the site.

And even when you can explain your whole justification for doing Y, it often doesn't help. In my experience, longer your question is, the more likely it is that people will just skim over it and misunderstand it. Or they'll argue against your reasons for doing Y and try to convince you that you really should be doing X anyway.

The moderation system is pretty much the same as any forum. You just have to read the sidebar rules first when you're posting on an unfamiliar subreddit, as you would when joining any community.

Yeah, this is a risk.

The best approach is to take advantage of the fact that Bandcamp lets you download everything and simply download everything you buy and keep backups (as you would with any other important data)