Hacksaw

joined 1 year ago
[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Not even that complex anymore, just download brave and "open private window with tor". Then go to the website and download the data.

Downloading a "tor browser" always sound more "hacker" than it is these days.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I completely agree. This is going to free kids from someone taking a picture of them doing something relatively harmless and extorting them. "That was AI, I wasn't even at that party 🤷"

I can't wait for childhood and teenage life to being a bit more free and a bit less constantly recorded.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago

Nobody is giving away i9 hardware at i3 prices otherwise everyone would buy the cheapest model and part it out for massive profit.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Look at some n95 NUCs on Amazon, or any mini pc really. Often less than 200$ for a full windows PC that can stream anything you throw at it.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 49 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Space x doesn't work thanks to Musk. It works DESPITE him, and it requires careful management.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 73 points 4 months ago (2 children)

The best part about this is that UMG WMG and SMG all simultaneously went "you can't take an artist's life work and exploit it, that's unfair, it's OUR job to take an artist's life's work and exploit it"

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 11 points 4 months ago

AI isn't "like a person" it doesn't "learn like a person" it doesn't "think like a person" it's nothing like a person. It's a a machine that creates copies of whatever you put into it. It's a machine that a real person, or group of people, own. These people TAKE all the stuff everyone else created and put it into their copy machine.

In fact it's really easy to show that it's a copy machine because the less stuff you put into it the more of a direct copy you get out of it. If you put only one song, or one artist, into it then virtually everything it creates would be direct copyright infringements. If you put all of the worlds music into it the copying becomes more blurred, more complex, more interesting, and therefore more valuable.

Sure AI is a great innovation, but if someone wants to put my work into a copying machine they're going to have to acquire it from me legally.

No one is against AI, we're just against the people who own the AI machines stealing our work without paying for it.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I chose NOT diddling kids!

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I think you're mixing copyright which protects works and patients which protect inventions as well as the timelines.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 34 points 5 months ago (1 children)

More people were killed in the firebombing.

The theory that more people would have died of the nukes weren't dropped is FAR from settled fact. The Japanese were already looking to surrender and it's not likely the bomb played a big part in that decision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki?wprov=sfla1

Regardless it's nothing to get banned over, that's for sure.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 38 points 5 months ago

Is it possible? Dude rejected a woman for having "a blown up vagina" and taking "too much birth control".... Those aren't real things and they're a good sign that OP has some real incel mentality. It's quite possible he's being an ass then when his partner reacts emotionally he says "cluster b, blown up vagina, too much birth control" and leaves.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 44 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Stores in most developed countries, UK included, can refuse service only for legitimate reasons, and they have to do so uniformly based on fair and unbiased rules. If they don't, they're at risk of an unlawful discrimination suite.

https://www.milnerslaw.co.uk/can-i-choose-my-customers-the-right-to-refuse-service-in-uk-law

She didn't do anything that would be considered a "legitimate reason", and although applied uniformly, it's difficult to prove that an AI model doesn't discriminate against protected groups. Especially with so many studies showing the opposite.

I think she has as much standing as anyone to sue for discrimination. There was no legitimate reason to refuse service, AI models famously discriminate against women and minorities, especially when it comes to "lower class" criminal behavior like shoplifting.

view more: ‹ prev next ›