wewbull

joined 1 year ago
[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

69 MJ is 19.17 kWh. About 86p of electricity at today's wholesale price in the UK (£45/MWh: today is fairly average).

The research they are doing is great, but there's so much engineering to be done to turn fusion into something practical; something capable of running streams of pulses, not just single ones.

This was the last experiment for this reactor running it outside of design limits.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi -1 points 9 months ago

The trained model is a work derived from masses of copywrite material. Distribution of that model is infringement, same as distributing copies of movies. Public access to that model is infringement, just as a public screening of a movie is.

People keep thinking it's "the picture the AI drew" that's the issue. They're wrong. It's the "AI" itself.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

What do you think the trained model is other than a derived work?

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Promotional images are still under copyright.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

AI is creating an image based on someone else's property. The difference is it's owned by a corporation.

This isn't the issue. The copyright infringement is the creation of the model using the copywrite work as training data.

All NYT is doing is demonstrating that the model must have been created using copywrite works, and hence infringement has taken place. They are not stating that the model is committing an infringement itself.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

They are showing that the author of the tool has comitted massive copyright infringement in the process construction of the tool.

...unless they licensed all the copyright works they trained the model on. (Hint: they didn't, and we know they didn't because the copyright holders haven't licensed their work for that purpose. )

It doesn't matter if a company charges or not for anything. It's not a factor in copyright law.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 5 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Copyleft is not public domain, and requires copyright law to function.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The article uses Midjourney. Nobody is tuning it.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

...and that's why the person you originally replied to asked their question. General popularity is generally a bad proxy metric for personal preference.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Is it impossible to like things outside the mainstream?

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I think it's more that people confuse the Israeli government with "the Jewish people", when the truth is that they are very separate. The Israeli people are somewhere in the middle. There seems to be a bunch of them who are quite supportive of their government's actions.

[–] wewbull@iusearchlinux.fyi 3 points 10 months ago

Also libretube (android client to piped.video so you don't connect to YouTube at all) and clipious (android client to invidious) are worth looking at too. You'll need to tweak the servers you connect to to get good performance, but both work quite nicely.

view more: next ›