As far as I know, federated learning is pretty much dead. The point would be that it allows organizations to create a joint model without sharing data. But it doesn’t look like anyone who doesn’t want to share data wants to share a model.

This too shall pass.

It’s just as easy. I was surprised to learn that they hired a voice actress. I guess hiring voice actors is cheaper than risking having to explain technology to a jury.

To contribute: http://warrior.archiveteam.org/

Help? https://wiki.archiveteam.org/

Background on the project: https://netzpolitik.org/2023/archive-team-shutdowns-dont-stop-during-the-weekends/

Haywire. You don’t see that often anymore.

I don’t think so, reading their terms.

I doubt this has to do with “powerful people”. A DDOS attack does not remove anything from the net, but only makes it temporarily hard to reach.

There are firms that specialize in suppressing information on the net. They use SEO tricks to get sites down-ranked, as well as (potentially fraudulent) copyright and GDPR request.

There must be any number of “little guys” who hate the Internet Archive. They scrape copyrighted stuff and personal data “without consent” and even disregard robots.txt. Lemmy is full of people who think that people should go to jail for that sort of thing.

Yes, better tools to analyze data will yield great results. Even a good push to scan all those finds and make all the data available would probably allow amazing new discoveries. The catch is that people like to hoard that data and milk it for their own careers and fame.

That said… LLM is Large Language Model. By definition, LLMs are unlikely to analyze 3-dimensional shapes. The newer AIs, like Gemini or GPT-4o, also use vision and audio but they are often still called (multimodal) LLMs. It’s justifiable as they still seem to have language at the core, but it’s getting increasingly dubious.

Not exactly ancestors, as others have said.

DNA doesn’t last nearly long enough. Scientists have made great strides in analyzing ancient DNA (aDNA), They have decoded the genomes of Neanderthals and other extinct human species. But that aDNA is only tens of thousands of years old. IIRC the theoretical maximum is something like 1 million years. No chance on dinosaur DNA.

As to how what evidence there is, I think that’s already sufficiently answered, and better than I could.

Same year that the productivity-pay gap begins. Hmm.

In Germany, the last conscripts were called up in 2011.

Not saying you’re wrong, but it’s a bit late for that. EG Facebook, Inc. v. Power Ventures, Inc. was decided in 2009. We can only hope that these mistakes are not repeated.

I don’t understand why people here are so gung-ho on intellectual property. It doesn’t fit with the values that are otherwise espoused here and I worry that it indicates a more general rightward shift in economic policy preference.

Hugging Face is the usual platform for sharing datasets and models.

Copyright preemption is a long-standing legal doctrine. Congress makes copyright laws. State law and contract law has to give way.

They can still use EU law to extract money, just not as much.

I don’t think it’s entirely clear what effect a login-wall would have. Facebook has been quite successful with that technique in the past. So there are some precedents. But I think today there is more understanding for the harmful effects these had.

that will ultimately be used to create huge amounts of wealth for very few,

But… That is what these poisoning attacks are fighting for. They are attacking open image generators that can be used by anyone. You can use them for fun or for business, without having to pay rent to some owner who is not lifting a finger. What do you think will happen if you knock that out?

This attack doesn’t target Big Tech, at all. The model has to be open to pull off an attack like that.

This doesn’t have anything to do with tracking. This is supposed to sabotage free and open image generators (ie stable diffusion). It’s unlikely to do anything, though.

Hard to say what the makers want to achieve with this. Even if it did work, it would help artists just as much, as better DRM would help programmers. On its face, this is just about enforcing some ultra-capitalist ideology that wants information to be owned.

You’re allowed to use copyrighted works for lots of reasons. EG satire parody, in which case you can legally publish it and make money.

The problem is that this precise situation is not legally clear. Are you using the service to make the image or is the service making the image on your request?

If the service is making the image and then sending it to you, then that may be a copyright violation.

If the user is making the image while using the service as a tool, it may still be a problem. Whether this turns into a copyright violation depends a lot on what the user/creator does with the image. If they misuse it, the service might be sued for contributory infringement.

Basically, they are playing it safe.

She just says nice things? That’s it? I’m completely ignorant on celebrities or pop music. I find that WP has a page on the “Political impact of Taylor Swift”

It sounds she is no different from a corporation putting a rainbow flag to their logo for pride month. I mean, it’s something. One shouldn’t be too cynical. But it’s also kinda normal.

significantly less evil than other billionaires

How so? Genuine question.

And so it goes. People hate the big picture but every detail is fine. The mosaic won’t change while you keep every stone in place.