• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 18th, 2023

help-circle



  • The only issue with your second point is that it can eventually become a quagmire when you do need to upgrade it.

    I work for a very old company who held to that philosophy for many years. And while any individual component could be looked at and seen as running fine, when they did finally decide it was time to upgrade they were faced with needing to upgrade everything simultaneously.

    All of the tech was too old, so no current tech had the sort of backwards compatible bridge that helps you move forward. It’s like figuring out how to get your telegram system to also work on your WiFi network, nobody makes any interfaces for that.

    Instead of slowly and gradually replacing components over time, they’re faced with a single major overhaul that’s put the entire company at risk because they have to completely shut down for over a month.



  • Until TV is setup the same way Spotify/YouTube music/apple music is where you just pick one you like and listen to the same music the other platforms have, they’ll continue to have pirating problems.

    I currently pay more per month for the various components needed for highly effective pirating than I would for cable and that’s purely because it offers a better experience. I can’t buy a plex-like experience anywhere for any price legally.

    Fix that and I’ll go legit just like I did for music.



  • Struggling to sort out my thoughts on this one.

    I’m not really sure comparing AI to a human artist learning and being inspired by others quite fits. At least in the context of a commercial AI (one that a company charges others to use). It feels scummy for a company (for profit entity) to steal training data from others without consent, and then turn around and charge people for the product they built on that stolen content.

    That said, existing copyright law allows for ‘fair use’, which includes educational purposes. In that light, AI companies could be seen as a sort of AI school program. But the icky part to me, is that AI is not a person. It can’t choose to leave the school. That school can then profit off that student forever and ever.

    I feel like the fair use argument for education applies to humans, not AI (at least not till they actually gain sapience). AI are machines that can be leveraged and exploited by the few and powerful, and that power should come without us subsidizing their development.

    Though honestly it’s sort of a moot point, because it’s already done and we’re very unlikely to ever properly charge them now. And now that they have the start, they have a leg up on everyone else. So the morality of how it was built no longer really matters, unless we want to argue AI should all be open source or public domain.








  • A big hurdle of AI is the fact that they really can’t ‘learn’, at least not like humans can, where we filter out bad data or go back and correct previous assumptions (not that we do this perfectly). Seems like anyone who’s able to truly figure out how to teach AI without needing super-clean data sets will have basically unlocked something pretty close to the singularity. Which makes me assume that we’re honestly no where close to figuring that out and that sample collapse is much more likely (with possibly the internet as a whole being effectively ruined, same as voice calls have been effectively ruined by rampant spam).