![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
While I am generally in the “copyright doesn’t matter when it comes to AI” camp, I also work in advertising. Most people do not use ad blockers.
This is an interesting point that I haven’t previously considered.
While I am generally in the “copyright doesn’t matter when it comes to AI” camp, I also work in advertising. Most people do not use ad blockers.
This is an interesting point that I haven’t previously considered.
I don’t even let them in the room. Housekeeping left the door to my room open once for the entire day. I was across from the elevator. Thankfully nothing was stolen, but ya know, fool me once
The cost is too high? Seriously?
You’re not paying anything for the service. You have no concept of what their costs are. You’re mildly inconvenienced by some annoying and slightly obtrusive ads.
It’s a business, not a charity. And they owe you nothing.
Who do you expect to pay for it?
Always was. How tf do you think they make money
It’s definitely written by someone who’s never used a VR headset. It only takes a second to realize that these screens are nowhere near the resolution of your eye. Ya know, cause small text that would be easily read on my phone is blurry as fuck on a VR headset
The ability to win the buy box is exceptionally predictable.
It is based on a combination of factors. The price point, fulfillment method, shipping cost, and feedback provided by customers about each individual seller.
If I am the brand owner, using Fulfillment by Amazon, have the lowest price, and good seller feedback, I will win.
If you come on the listing a lower price, no shipping cost, and equivalent feedback, but you are shipping the item yourself and have a slightly lower feedback rating, you will not win the buy box.
The system is not rigged against the customer. Amazon is attempting to improve the customer experience, with price just being part of it
Prices do not vary based on estimated income. Pricing control is not that granular.
There is a new promotion type used by sellers that allow us to target people who have abandoned cart. We can offer exclusive discounts to those people.
Majority of products are not sold by Amazon. Some sellers use price automation software, some use built-in functionality provided by Amazon. Amazons built in functionality allows sellers to set competitive prices relative to other sellers on Amazon.
It has nothing to do with page views, clicks, or cart adds. Sellers cannot see cart adds in real time.
If you read the article, you would see that larger diesel engines have lower emissions due to reduced compression ratios.
I don’t agree. The publisher of the material does not get to dictate what it is used for. What are we protecting at the end of the day and why?
In the case of a textbook, someone worked hard to explain certain materials in a certain way to make the material easily digestible. They produced examples to explain concepts. Reproducing and disseminating that material would be unfair to the author who worked hard to produce it.
But the author does not have jurisdiction over the knowledge gained. They cannot tell the reader that they are forbidden from using the knowledge gained to tutor another person in calculus. That would be absurd.
IP law protects the works of the creator. The author of a calculus textbook did not invent calculus. As such, copyright law does not apply.
Then every single student graduating college produces derivative work.
Everything that required the underlying knowledge gained from the textbooks studied, or research papers read, is derivative work.
At the core of this, what are we saying? Your machine could only explain calculus because it was provided information from multiple calculus textbooks? Well, that applies to literally everyone.
While I would like to be in a world where knowledge is free, this is apples and oranges.
OpenAI can purchase a textbook and read it. If their AI uses the knowledge gained to explain maths to an individual, without reproducing the original material, then there’s no issue.
The difference is the student in your example didn’t buy their textbook. Someone else bought it and reproduced the original for others to study from.
If OpenAI was pirating textbooks, that would be a wholly separate issue.
Reproduction of copyrighted material would be breaking the law. Studying it and using it as reference when creating original content is not.
The issue is simply reproduction of original works.
Plenty of people mimic the style of other artists. They do this by studying the style of the artist they intend to mimic. Why is it different when a machine does the same thing?
Not much. Reddit was left leaning, but Lemmy is liberal as fuck. I consider myself left leaning, but I can’t stand the political bias here
It looks like you’re just so engrained with hate for Musk that you’re literally denying reality.
SpaceX has paid for starlink through selling flights on their rockets, not through “subsidies like this”
You seem confused if you’re flip flopping between starlink being paid for by consumers and subsidies.
This is interesting. It seems a fair resolution would be to pay the content owner what they would have made in ad revenue.
As long as the AI is not reproducing original works to the extent that it violates fair use, I don’t think copyright laws really apply. But there’s definitely lost revenue.