I don't, it's not the 18th century and the industrial revolution. Copyright had a time and place and that isn't the here and now. We are worse off for copyright and patients today. Today they enshrine wealth and are a tool to prevent progress and inflate cost.
hglman
joined 1 year ago
Clearly not , which only makes the point. Consumer protection for digital products is weak and needs reform.
Using it to generate things that you double check. Transforming generative work to review work is a boost in productivity. So writing of any kind, art, etc. asking the llm for facts without context is a gross mistake. Prompting it to generate a specific paragraph in a larger, technical or regulator document is useful.
Bc if you had meme dreams they would be nightmares?
The world is a much worse place with bad search. We need a search system that is treated like a utility and paid based on success not ad views.
It's not as if Google's results have improved in that time span. They are significantly worse now.
I really enjoy gnome, I much prefer it.
You can give people infections on purpose. If he had died of a genetic heart defect it would be different.
Can't kill them the same way, then it would be obvious.
The comment above ignored the article and is just talking how digital media can be revoked.
That wasn't the point being made.
Authentication of the author is not the same as copyright.