lily33

joined 2 years ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
DHS considers reality show pitting immigrants against one another for citizenship in c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 9 points 5 days ago

DHS Entertainment Presents:

The Uplift!

22 savages... 3 arenas... 1 ticket to civilization.

Who will win the coveted opportunity to help Make America Great Again?

Please consider supporting Lemmy development in c/meta@lemm.ee
Conception begins at ejaculation in c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

BTW, this absolutely represses men, women, children, etc, as "genetic material" is contained in every cell of everyone's body. In nails, hair follicles, urine, saliva...

EU whacks Apple and Meta with $800 million in antitrust fines. Meta calls its penalty a ‘tariff’ in c/world@lemmy.world
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 41 points 4 weeks ago

Meta calls its penalty a ‘tariff’

That's a retaliatory tariff. Meta broke the law, and the EU retaliated.

AI: a fork in the road for open source in c/programming@programming.dev
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 3 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

The fact is, currently, AI can't write good code. I'm sure that at some point in the future they will - but we're not there yet, and probably have some years still.

Imagine at some point in the future, where an AI can program any piece of software you want for you, and do it well. At that point, the value of code itself will be minimal. If you keep your code proprietary, I'll just get the AI to re-implement the functionality anew and publish it.

Therefore, all code will be permissive open source. There would be no point in keeping anything proprietary, and also no point in applying copyleft. But at this point the copyleft "hack" would simply be unnecessary, so permissive open source would be just as good.

Until then, me not using AI doesn't in any way prevent others from training AI on my code. So I just don't see training on my code as a valid reason to avoid it. I don't use AI currently - but that's for entirely pragmatic reasons: I'm not yet happy with the code it generates.

AI: a fork in the road for open source in c/programming@programming.dev
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 20 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)

with a long tail of grumpy holdouts who adhere to free software principles

Nothing in the core free software principles - namely, the four freedoms - actually concerns the development process and tools used - or copyright. It's all about what you can do with the software.

The GPL is more of a "hack" that "perverts" copyright to enforce free software principles - because that was the tool available, not because the people who wrote it really liked intellectual property.

This might have some impact on efficiency in c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 11 points 1 month ago

Having to import my tariff management solution is a critical national security risk. Needs to be built-in. PEP soon, please?

This might have some impact on efficiency in c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

What a great way to reduce external dependencies and mitigate supply chain attacks!

‘The platform where bot farms are still effective:’ How Russia is leveraging TikTok's algorithm to try to warp public opinion in Ukraine in c/technology@beehaw.org
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

The platform where bot farms are still effective

Spoken like they're no longer effective on the other platforms.

DeepSeek: The Chinese Communist Party’s newest AI advance is making repression smarter, cheaper, and more deadly. Even worse, they aim to export it to the world. in c/technology@beehaw.org
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Oh, no! Someone's publishing open models better than our closed ones! How are we going to make profit now? Do something! Quick!!!

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Any accessibility service will also see the "hidden links", and while a blind person with a screen reader will notice if they wonder off into generated pages, it will waste their time too. Especially if they don't know about such "feature" they'll be very confused.

Also, I don't know about you, but I absolutely have a use for crawling X, Google maps, Reddit, YouTube, and getting information from there without interacting with the service myself.

*Permanently Deleted* in c/technology@lemmy.world
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I would love to think so. But the word "verified" suggests more.

45
How does L4sBot choose which articles to post? (lemm.ee)
 

This is a meta-question about the community - but seeing how many posts here are made by L4sBot, I think it's important to know how it chooses the articles to post.

I've tried to find information about it, but I couldn't find much.

3
Licenses for LLM models (lemm.ee)
 

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding of a license is that it gives me permission to use/distribute something that's otherwise legally protected. For instance, software code is protected by copyright, and FOSS licenses give me the right to distribute it under some conditions.

However, LLMs are produced by a computer, and aren't covered by copyright. So I was hoping someone who has better understanding of law to answer some questions for me:

  1. Is there some legal framework that protects AI models, so that I'd need a license to distribute them? How about using them, since many licenses do restrict use as well.

  2. If the answer to the above is no: By mentioning, following and normalizing LLM licenses, are we essentially helping establish the principle that we do need permission from companies to use their models, and that they have the right to restrict us?

view more: next ›