![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/c0e83ceb-b7e5-41b4-9b76-bfd152dd8d00.png)
But considering that humans do get copyright strikes when they do something too similar that should also applies to AI, doesn’t matter if it’s not exact.
But considering that humans do get copyright strikes when they do something too similar that should also applies to AI, doesn’t matter if it’s not exact.
Except the illegally obtaining the copyrighted material part, which is the main point. And definitely not on this scale.
if you read a copyrighted material without paying and then forgot most of it a month later with vague recollection of what you’ve read the fact is you still accessed and used the copyrighted material without paying.
Now let’s go a step further, you write something that is inspired by that copyrighted material and what you wrote become successful to some degree with eyes on it, but you refuse to admit that’s where you got the idea from because you only have a vague recollection. The fact is you got the idea from the copyrighted material.
You have to assume flawed logic if you want to understand him.
Yes, I understand :) Just thought it’d be nice to increase awareness of the problem.
And give more traffic to nitter.net
I get having megathreads, but currently kbin doesn’t care whether a post on Lemmy is pinned, so megathreads make it harder here to follow news and discussions on the topic.
Can’t be done unfortunately. There’s a limit to how many pending moderator invites there can be. r/politicalhumor did the next best thing though.
What I hate most about it is people are doing very poorly at checking their own information intake for accuracy and misinformation already, this comes at one of the worst time to make things go south. It’s going to challenge the stability of society in a lot of way and with how crypto went I have 0% trust that techbros and corporate will not sabotage efforts to get things right for the sake of their own profit.
A recent report saying the opposite, but with proper data to back it up unlike this poorly thought out personal anecdote.
So…this whole evidence point out by the author amounts to personal experience, and not even a kind of personal experience that is good for evidence. Smaller instances closing down isn’t the same as large instances closing down when it comes to adoption. Heck, there’s a recent report that shows the opposite of what is said here, with proper data to back it up.
I think the best outcome is for Fediverse to succeed at proving the model is better for users than mega corps. Then grow and last long enough until the EU takes notice, such that if any bad actors try to ruin it they’d want to protect it. We’re probably talking far into the future, but I think if handled well it can get to that point.
If that’s the case then there’s no need for it to be off-record. Unless the conversation of what you pointed out is open to scrutiny it shouldn’t happen.
Exactly this right here.