FatCrab

Ah, very interesting. Appreciate the insights!

Yea, but Greenland is also autonomous so its laws do diverge from Denmark's in a lot of ways. I'm not am expert or particularly knowledgeable on either, though, so just pointing it out because i don't know where those deltas are. I don't think you can actually own land in Greenland, for example, and rather long term lease plots from the government is perhaps one case?

ML techniques have been very useful in compression, yes, but it's sort of nuts to say that a data structure that encodes only (sometimes overly so for certain regions of its latent space/embedding space/semantics space/whatever you want to call it right now) relationships between values rather than value sequences themselves as storing contiguous copyright protected works is storing partiularized creative works in particularly identifiable manner.

On the other hand, it's hard to have a serious discussion with people who insist that building a LLM or diffusion model amounts to copying pieces of material into an obfuscated database. And then having to deal with the typical reply after explanation is attempted of "that isn't the point!" but without any elaboration strongly implies to me that some people just want to be pissy and don't want to hear how they may have been manipulated into taking a pro-corporate, hyper-capitalist position on something.

I believe they are completing their modern international airport this year or next? Which should make Nuuk, and Greenland, far more accessible and thus help its tourism industry. From my understanding, it's also very hard to immigrate to.

I'm not sure how it could be besides the point, though it may not be entirely dispositive. I take ownership to be a question of who has a controlling and exclusionary right to something--in this case thats copyright. Copyright allows you to license these things and extract money for their use. If there is no copyright, there is no secure monetization (something companies using AI generated materials absolutely keep high in mind). The question was "who would own it" and I think it's pretty clear cut who would own it. No one.

The outputs would be considered no one's outputs as no copyright is afforded to AI general content.

This is absolutely wrong about how something like SD generates outputs. Relationships between atomic parts of an image are encoded into the model from across all training inputs. There is no copying and pasting. Now whether you think extracting these relationships from images you can otherwise access constitutes some sort of theft is one thing, but characterizing generative models as copying and pasting scraped image pieces is just utterly incorrect.

It's just woke. /s

I'll second this experience. Pricing aside (and even then, because of their new recycling policy, I was able to replace an old galaxy nearly the size of a tablet with a new flip-- that has VERY surprisingly become my favorite phone I've ever owned-- for like a hundred bucks), I've never had complaints about my Samsung phone and wearables that weren't general to all smartphones. And the easy integrations between my watch, phone, and earbuds, all Samsung, is really great.

No, but parenting can be pretty complex and there is a large degree of variability child to child. The idea that you either are a psychotic helicopter parent (because there is really no other interpretation to demanding a parent be around their toddler 24/7) or simply should not have children is a gross oversimplification and also, more importantly, fuckinh prima facie dumb as shit.