This is the dumb kind of “best do nothing, because both no is perfect” approach to making sure no disincentives are ever taken because someone somewhere else might also try to do the illegal thing that they’ll lose access to the moment they’re caught…

I never suggested destroying the technology that is “AI”. I’m not uncomfortable about AI, I’ve even considered pivoting my career in that direction.

I suggested destroying the particular implementation that was trained on the illegitimate data. If someone can recreate it using legitimate data, GREAT. That’s what we want to happen. The tool isn’t the problem. It’s the method they’re using to train them.

Please don’t make up random ass narratives I never even hunted at, and then argue against them.

That’s stupid. The damage is still done to the owner of that data used illegally. Make them destroy it.

But when you levy such miniscule fines that are less than they stand to make from it, it’s just a cost of business. Fines can work if they were appropriate to the value derived.

Most AI are not built to answer questions. They’re designed to act as some kind of detection/filter heuristic to identify specific things about an input that leads to a desired output.

If you can still use it after you stole it, as opposed to not being able to use it at all… Then it does give you an incentive

It wouldn’t be. It would still work. It just wouldn’t be exclusively available to the group that created it-any competitive advantage is lost.

But all of this ignores the real issue - you’re not really punishing the use of unauthorized data. Those who owned that data are still harmed by this.

Making it open source doesn’t change how it works. It doesn’t need the data after it’s been trained. Most of these AIs are just figuring out patterns to look for in the new data it comes across.

Squadron 42 was initially supposed to be released in 2016.

The ship has sailed on concept of hitting deadlines at that company. Unlike half of their concept ships.

What deadlines? Squadron 42 was supposed to release in 2016…

That ship has sailed.

What dumbass is letting AI post articles without human oversight? That’s like rule one of what not to do.

Did we already forget that BG3 existed like once year later…?

Putting things in people’s mailboxes is a federal crime. Don’t do this.

If it’s not yours and you’re not a USPS employee, don’t touch it.

Mastodon is confusing as shit though. They could have made is not as confusing, but this is what happens when you get backend only developers designing the front end of a product.

Ugh, Google+ was so much better than Facebook. The whole circles concept was a game changer for social media that no one else has really adopted in a meaningful way. Half the reason millennials began to leave Facebook was not wanting their parents seeing what they’re posting, so being able to decide which group can see a particular post was an awesome idea.

Sadly it just never got the adoption

Boomers’ children are grown ass adults with their own kids now. Those parents are the ones who grew up playing games. This dumbass narrative doesn’t play anymore

Most people, when speaking about a gaming device, aren’t talking about the ability to play things from 40 years ago that you could run on a smart toaster

No, Twitter changed its algorithms leading up to the election. That was not self selection. They were actively pushing right wing bullshit down everyone’s throats because the owner spent $200 million trying to get the dipshit elected.

Which is no different from any of the US social media companies tweaking their algorithms against criticism of all number of political things.

Twitter blatantly forced right wing radical propaganda down their entire user bases through a for months. Facebook was selling user data to foreign influence groups to assist with political message targeting. They’re all the same.

Except all the social media are doing the exact same thing. This is pointless political posturing

This was about bluesky/Twitter type social media. Things with reshare and follows to specific users, where someone you follow arguing with someone you don’t will expose you to the person you don’t follow.