pessimizer

You seem to be confused. Every opinion on here is subjective, and no one was suggesting that the poster should be arrested.

I think it's better to say that it wasn't the electronic side of things that prevented that. Game design is technical.

Every board game could have been built thousands of years ago, at least after the dawn of some reasonable writing/drawing media. But technology in design hadn't accumulated enough. To go farther, every bit of math could have been done thousands of years ago, but new math had to draw on earlier math. New math didn't rely (much) on special paper.

Also, "hit" probably isn't a good metric. Those games might have showed up back then and just been moderately notable, like dozens or hundreds of other games were.

This is one of those "it's all so complicated" answers that ignores the fact that for most of the past century they managed to do this without the thing that you're claiming is now necessary.

And the real answer comes out eventually: it's necessary now because we consolidated and cut costs and jobs. The people left who we pay next to nothing could never even handle them at the level we had then, because we laid off everyone who knew that old stuff.

> Even if you only save $500/store/year, you can see that it really adds up over a chain of 1000 stores.

And even if an event like this only happens once in 20 years, all of those savings evaporate. Thank god nobody will get fired for this. Or at least the first wave - it will be insane if nobody at the chain hit by this current wave gets fired.

And Marlo Thomas was That Girl.

This is that fun active domestic propaganda, like when they started calling remote controlled quadcopters "drones" in order to justify murdering people by remote control.

Or when they rebranded financing terrorism into "material support for terrorism," loudly promising, over and over again, calling everyone who questioned them conspiracy theorists, that the word "material" was always going to mean physical and never mean speech (and never almost immediately mean clear and unambiguous.)

Bernie is leading the charge here. What an abject disappointment. Ancient Vermont commies tried to tell me but I didn't listen. Trump has a long history of taking the often dumb, often evil stuff that Democrats say and immediately stealing it for himself - ever since he got birtherism from the PUMAs (Party Unity My Ass), or "Fake News" directly from Hillary Clinton.

Nothing sounds more scary than invading foreign superintelligence! Better root all those computers so they can't run anything unapproved.

Do you not understand that analogies are used for people who don't understand what H1B holders are, or what the user of the analogy thinks of them?

Almost none. I went to engineering school at a major state college in the US, and it was nice to find even an immigrant who had been mostly raised here in the same program.

American elites abandoned Americans after the Soviet Union fell. Only useful as a servant class. They also encouraged parents to abandon their children. Immigrant parents come here and work like mules, spoil and dominate their children, and would never imagine that kicking them to the wolves was a virtue. In the US (and in the West in general), we teach working people to have contempt for their own offspring; it's counter-evolutionary. Meanwhile Western elites spare nothing for their dimwitted failchildren.

The default I expect from any intellectual or technical achievement is a truly challenging last name.

The comment you're replying to makes clear that they're not using it on servers. I do the same thing (testing on my laptop(s), stable on my servers); you just have to commit to keeping track of what's going on and manually patch if you think that it's necessary.

I have to add that for me, testing definitely breaks stuff sometimes. Nothing beyond my ability to fix, though. Nothing beyond anyone's ability now that AI is around.

Speaking as somebody who stayed on it way too long (until 10 years ago, maybe) it was because people constantly told me scare stories about how difficult it was to configure into something usable.

I had to go through the torturous path of Ubuntu -> Mint -> Mint Debian -> Debian. The last step was after I used a Debian live disk to do something and I could see that the stories were nonsense; just something that had adhered to the word Debian in my mind through repetition.

The two worst parts about it were 1) that I had long left Ubuntu on servers and had been using Debian there for years - I was just afraid of the desktop for some reason, and 2) that if I had just listened 15-20 years ago when people told me that FrankenDebians were nothing but problems, I would have never been caught in the net.

I've never been a fan of Ubuntu's business practices, but I'm just generally not into Debian derivatives anymore. If I were to leave Debian, it would be for an entirely different (and philosophically different) distro. I probably make an exception for Devuan, because it's only trying to change one thing (that I think of as the biggest threat to Linux, the final boss evil spawn of RedHat.) Devuan is an escape hatch for when the rugpull happens.

The tl;dr of an article should be about the article.

I'm sure that's intentional, so the article wouldn't be stupid. You can often figure out the meaning if you don't know the language at all, but who cares?

Other than language learners. If you want to learn someone's language, read their comic books. They have pictures.

Most people can. But you can be sued in Canada just like anywhere else; it isn't legal. According to a search, the damages per offense may be capped at $5K CAD, though, which is great compared to the US.

I agree, and also

> A court has already called the training fair use

isn't dispositive. Another court, a less stupid or corrupt one, could decide differently. SCOTUS could decide differently.

But using illegally obtained material as the foundation of your business and destroying it for fear of litigation, both of those things are clearly criminal.

This is organized crime, because the organization knew (and depended on the fact) that he was doing this, and it is also the intentional destruction of evidence.

The fact that he was seeding a torrent is the thing that least matters here. They weren't making billions from seeding a torrent, they were spending bandwidth to do it. The fact that they downloaded a bunch of copyrighted works illegally in order to create their business is.

Copyright violation is civil, but conspiracy is criminal, and destruction of evidence is criminal. These AI companies are criminal. Everything associated with these enterprises should be seized and either run by the state, or run on behalf of the civilly injured parties.

edit: keep downvoting it, but I will keep posting it. This behavior is just getting by through nerve, bribery, and the fact that the US economy depends on it being successful. It is unambiguously criminal, and anybody aware of it who participated (everybody) is implicated. It is so bizarre how you people think you're better than people smuggling counterfeit designer bags or selling bootleg DVDs. You're worse.

> Now what about those millions of lines of code? Wasn’t the agent swarm supposed to take care of it?

What's the joke? They're literally saying, every day, that this is true to a civilization endangering extent. They're making demands based on this, and politicians are taking up those demands.

And now they're paying bullshit $5K bug bounties for account-stealing exploits on their own platform. They should have paid more just the make the bug seem more grandiose; I don't know who let them get away with this - this is what happens when CEOs run their own PR I guess. It's basically an public announcement that they're total fakes.

The contents of the article make it clear that "touch wood" is basically synonymous with "knock on wood," making the knocking less important than the touching.

But is is important to mention that a ctrl-f on that page for "unpainted" is proof that you didn't spend much time looking.

> The New York Times’ lawsuit, meanwhile, asks everyone to ignore a half century of legal history and progress, and toss aside the longstanding principle of fair use in their own narrow pursuit of an undeserved payday.

There's absolutely no "fair use" precedent that says that you can program a computer with copyrighted material. They're just asking for an exception essentially based on their compression being lossy, which of course the law takes the absolute opposite opinion on e.g. distributing a 1080p of my bluray disc has been determined to definitely not be fair use.

Their essential case is that they use the word "training," and people training themselves from books is fair use, so since they use the word "training" then what they're doing is fair use. It's stupid, and judges going for it are either stupid or corrupt. I'm not actually copying your book, I'm training my printing press.

I know a woman who is like that about bare feet, but she doesn't expect the world to indulge her.

If it's your configuration, it's not a problem with your OS, it's a problem with your configuration. Your problem is specifically that your OS has chosen not to support certain characters in filenames, and you want to write files containing those characters.

No. Free would mean that any modifications that you distribute would also be under the same license, and you would have to make them available in a usable form. Open means you can do whatever you want with it, as long as you include a copy of the license, the copyright, and possibly the author's name(s).

> Businesses should be able to release things to the public yet still be able to control who makes money off of it.

Nobody's stopping them. People are complaining about the lying. They can do whatever they want with their IP.

"Open Source" as a phrase does not. I have no idea what you mean by "Open Source as a concept," especially 1) because you're capitalizing it, and 2) because you're saying that the concept doesn't mean anything in particular.

It's annoying that people pretend like Open Source was a common phrase before it was invented to subvert Free Software by OSI, and it's shameful that people would tell this lie for the sole purpose of trading on the goodwill that Open Source software has created. Even in the world where people were always talking about "open source" before the OSI, that talk is certainly not the reason that people who are using the term to describe non-OSI approved licenses are using it today. They're intentionally trying to defraud people, and have the nerve to be snotty about it.

> Back then the establishment used the CIA/FBI to prevent a multi-coalition, working class movement across ethnicity, unions, and religions that would have made the US a better democracy.

Back then the establishment used the CIA/FBI to attack black civil rights movements. They also used it to attack things that were associated with the Soviet Union, including associating black civil rights with communism and socialism, like you're doing here.

Maybe this was not about everybody and not about you?

Major competitors shouldn't be able to acquire each other in any society that cares about healthy markets.

So what you're saying is that they're not actually trying to maximize profit, they're just trying to maximize profit to prove that they can maximize profit for investors?

> I don’t feel like reality is so interesting that CC devs are sitting in a room theorizing how to extract the most profit from their users.

Do you really think this is so interesting, or something that people who work jobs have a responsibility to do?

What does this have to do with whether the agent should ask for confirmation?

Please release more fake polls. Polling is almost always an attempt to influence elections, which is why they press release them. The results are race-based astrology. There's little reason to believe that fake polls will be statistically less accurate than real ones. People pretend like the prediction markets are news, and they're just a group of degenerate gamblers with money to burn who are summarizing what they're reading on twitter.

It is insane that Democratic candidates are dropping out of races as a result of reading fake polls on twitter. If their candidacy could be destroyed by that, it shouldn't have been started in the first place. Also, typical authoritarian solution to try to figure out how to eliminate or prosecute fake polls, rather than to end the substitution of triangulation for belief. It would be wonderful if someone could believe in something other than winning. You might win; people are starved for candidates who believe in something other than personal enrichment.

You can't libel the general public. I can lie about whatever poll I want, as long as I'm not selling you anything (which would be fraud.) Politicians can't be prosecuted for the promises they made during the campaign that they immediately abandoned after being elected, but I, a random citizen, am held to a higher standard about my pronouncements of the opinions of the randomly chosen and race-weighted public? Get out of here...

This is because they are baffling. I still don't understand BLM. Those women came out of nowhere; everybody organic who initiated the initial Ferguson protests was executed, and the media went all in. I am a black American and I know very few black Americans who participated, but tons of white liberal types. All of the black American people I know of who tried to get involved and started their own local chapters of BLM got no support or money from the national organization, other than disapproval of protests that they wanted to do on their own about local issues that they cared about. The national organization was drowning in institutional money.

Everything about it was just bizarre. I still can't deny that it was a color revolution to unseat Trump, and I wish I could.

Also, I still have a weird video of some strange masked and "tactically dressed" man who walked into the middle of the protests in some town and just started breaking the windows of businesses (an Auto Center iirc) without speaking to anyone who was actually protesting (peacefully), while they were yelling at him to stop. He then just leaves, and while one guy is walking after him and questioning him, he threatens the guy until he stops following.

There's also the weird French stuff where "black bloc" people are doing damage or in one case throwing a flash bang grenade, police rush in, a few words are exchanged, and then this "black bloc" leave with the police.

The blaming of the Russian Chinese anti-Semitic mullahs is the real conspiracy. What it looks like to me is that people may be engineering protests to justify crackdowns, or turning existing protests violent in order to shut them down. The masking that has been done since the "black bloc" started ruining protests and escalated greatly after covid just makes it too easy. Also the fact that these protests are generally slacktivist and not organized, so people don't expect to know each other. They get messages on social media that say that there's going to be a protest about some subject, and they feel obligated to show up - but they have no connection to each other.

It's weird that that's how it's expected to be now. This "protest" ritual has gone to the limits of artificiality. The "No Kings" "protests" in the US are directly run by Democratic contractors, and they text spam relentlessly from voter lists (I've gotten dozens, if not a hundred or two.) It isn't like grassroots people get together, discuss their grievances, and decide to coordinate a protest. It's completely top-down, coordinated with elections, and has no articulable grievances, just slogans.

Alienating, isolating, dislocating people, and shattering communities and families has resulted in people who are completely subject to centralized control. The state thinks the most dangerous issue in the world is that people might be able to speak to each other in an unmediated fashion. Can a state like that ever be happy about family, friendship, or community?

Or it will just park in the lot behind the jail, after safety legislation is passed that requires all new cars to double as jail cells.

Your hearing will be done through Android Auto/CarPlay directly with GPT-17.2 StellarumThalamum.

This violates the RICO statute; the entire organization was aware of and relied on the widespread and organized violation of copyright laws as the basis of their entire business. It is a criminal organization, should be seized, and everyone in the chain of command that was aware of or executed on this plan should be tried criminally.

I do not think training an AI model is Fair Use, because LLM "training" is being used as a metaphor for building a matrix with a computer. Only people and animals train and learn; computers run statistical problems over input, which in this case was illegal input acquired by humans.

But it does not matter whether training LLMs is Fair Use, "Fair Use" is a strange and arbitrary legal term that can be expanded to include AI if we wish. This was organized crime whether or not LLM training on copyrighted materials is fair use. It was organized crime whether or not they planned to use them for AI at all.

AI is irrelevant. They could have trained it on GPL'd or MIT code (as long as they then distributed according to the terms of the licenses), and works in the public domain. They could have gotten what they were doing explicitly declared to be fair use by the Library of Congress, and then purchased the materials, like they are belatedly doing now. It wasn't necessary to violate copyright law to prove the technology. They could have proved the technology, then asked for copyright law to be clarified, and licensed huge volumes of works from the very few publishers we have left. Becoming a criminal organization was an explicit choice they made, and they discussed its illegality, and even the risk that it would be discussed on HN, which might inspire prosecution.

The reason they are not being prosecuted is because the rich are beyond the law; prosecutors will not prosecute them. The RICO statute is clear, and explicitly mentions copyright violation.

We can sentence the executives harshly, but go easy on the lower level people, because they are intelligent and valuable to advance the technology. The executives aren't necessary for anything. They're currently running finance scams that are extremely dangerous for the economy. They belong in prison to protect the public.

This is an option that people (real people, with names) have, and are not taking. When they say that they care about law and order, and are worried about the behavior of these companies, they are lying. Trump could literally nationalize them for what they've done. They're vulnerable to any state's attorney who has any author in their state whose book was downloaded. Libgen/Annas-archive would have been the most important honeypot in history.