yeetard

If OpenAI did the same with Dall-e (provide you a snippet, within the legal limits of what they are able to reproduce. They can also direct you to buy a copy of it through them, if the publisher has a deal with [them]) things would be different.

You can not compare a single instance of whacky artwork created in parody of a pop culture figure to the machine that plagiarizes the work of thousands of people and an artstyle developed over decades.

>what is the potential harm here?

Like, harm to whom? Short term, for the viewer: none. The brand reputation aspect I have already mentioned. Mid-term it's media getting boring and predictable. Long term it's culture dying and all attempts at authentic human expression through art drowning in AI generated slop. That's more of a spiritual thing.

I don't know, what I do know is that every book on Google Books worth reading is behind a paywall

The trademarks

>They've had their content mocked, copied and even used as hate speech for decades now.

Yeah, by actual PEOPLE not corporations. Even then you aren't allowed to use copyrighted trade marks what the hell??

>There's a good arguement that all of these images are derivative parody works protected by Fair Use, AI-generated or not.

That doesn't even make sense.

>The AI-generation legality part is yet-to-be-decided-on, but it will probably err on the side of model freedom. I wager it's too late to draft a bill that changes things this far in the game.

Hmm، so let's see, it's the entirety of the worlds entertainment and media industry, estimated annual revenue (globally) 2.32 trillion U.S. dollars vs. some startup run by jewish guy that employs less than 400 people.

I agree tho that by now the cat is probably out of the bag and that people will most likely just create their own shitty little models at home and that this will only ever get easier as compute gets cheaper and cheaper.

But do people even realize, do they have the brainpower to understand that AI doesn't mean "independent consciouss mind living in a machine somewhere discovering ideas on its own", that it's in fact much more mundane than that and that in reality what all these models essentially are is just a distributed compression algorithms for digital media?

There isn't a human in the loop.

Still not legal right? I can kinda get posters but unless they aquired the right to every single frame in every single movie they used... Google can't show you links to streaming websites. Get caught making a camrip you go to fucking jail.

Don't get how any of this is allowed to happen. I mean, is Disney just retarded? They do realize that once Dall-e video edition gets released they're going to not have a business anymore, right?

this is a hilarious example for a serious problem. well done!

A repository of data loaders for LlamaIndex and LangChain

kinda??

personally i'm just so grateful that I got to experience the "authentic" "unpolluted" version of the internet.

Does freedom matter when there's nothing left to do?

since UBI does not mean "unlimited consumptions for everyone" but some people will definetly want to consume more than others, and assuming with rampant automation there will just be basically zero jobs available exclusively for humans I generally wonder what humans will do to get more money to consume more? It seems like were just moving to some new kind of feudalism which is kinda scary.

true also:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom's_2_sigma_problem

Hmmm... Seems like the traditional vector skin actually brakes the page now? Charts and pictures are all over the place.

Thank you so much actually

never before seen so much cope in a HN comment section. lmao

I laughed

It's funny how the comment section here is already prime example of people having v̵e̵r̵y̵ ̵p̵o̵o̵r̵ no attention management skill. How about we stop lamenting the obvious and start thinking about how we could solve the problem? Theoretically it should be a non-issue since (in theory) every disturbance can be overcome by applying adequate willpower (and abundance of information is probably much harder to create then abundance of willpower - or so I think but i don't see any obvious reason for why it would be any other way; took us about 5000 years to create the internet, but the will to do something great clearly came first - otherwise there wouldn't be a internet, duh!). I see a general conflict here with how our society functions as a whole. Our institutions, everything per default is already designed around stealing our attention. Other than eastern religions, abrahamism is less concerned with letting it's adherent find balance and inner peace in a tumultuous world, it's more concerned with keeping you entangled in a constant struggle within, with yourself, and with god or something. With corporations it's the same, except it's about consuming products now. If we delete this, we will probably revert back into the stone age and if we let it be and add too much willpower there is a chance that our civilisation becomes uncontrollable.

Psychology knows these concepts: Volition and executive functions. To fix the lack of the former Wikipedia suggests: Nothing, and for the lack of the latter it suggests CBT ( cock and b.., I mean cognitive behavior therapy) a.k.a nothing again, since cognitive behaviour therapy is a pseudoscientific scam that does not work. Also: "More research is required to develop interventions that can improve executive functions and help people generalize those skills to daily activities and settings." Wow, yeah, that is totally the reason for why there are no solutions for this! We just haven't done enough SCIENCE-ing, that's it folks! S C I E N C E!

So, I'm pretty open for new ideas here. Maybe an actual neuroscientist could chime in and lecture us about how our neuronal circuits work together to create attention, how the SAS works or something and how we could improve it. But I suspect my attention span is to short and I wouldn't be able to follow along anyway. Welp...

By delegating control to an algorithm.

Emphasis on "in the real world".

The question is, why did they disappear? Did people just stop caring about things? Who in the right mind would ever want to use reddit -in general- and who would want to use it as long as there is a traditional forum for <topic>?

big if true

Yeah, general channels are too ADHD and inferior to dedicated threads.

>Dude, just turn old

In all seriousness, I can't believe that we still haven't solved this. Crazy advanced social media but no workaround for the "networking problem". No, not gonna suggest we need a "productivity social network" or another meetups.com but could our existing social medias at lest be somewhat biased towards promoting content that connect people over common interest in the real world? Why can't they? (The answer is obvious).

>asking a question is not possible unless you personally find someone (or someones) qualified to answer it.

Ah, so we're at this old problem again (The you-need-to-know-the-right-people-problem). That didn't take long. How do I find experts that care about problem?