ekky43

Godt at se at der er nogle der gør et eller andet, for det er vel relevant, men jeg synes at ham Sebastian får formuleret sig selv ret uheldigt.

• Hvad i alverden skal "transfer" referere til? Menneskehandel? At snakke om følelser? Måske noget med fodbold, da det bliver nævnt i kontekst? Det må næsten være noget med fodbold, ikke også?

• "Hjerteviden som udtryk for kontakt med følelser og hjerte". Det har vi allerede et udtryk for, og det er "følelser". Hjerteviden er lidt noget andet, men jeg skal dog tilstå at det er sundt at kende sin hvilepuls og generelle blodtryk.

Not OP, and not native English, but going by this subs topic and my understanding of AMA (Ask Me Anything), OP's request doesn't sound outrageous in any way.

Looking at the comments, I'm clearly missing something, so perhaps I could have you clarify this misunderstanding for me?

Edit: looking at your answer to OP clears up my question. I also stumbled on OP's ambiguous spelling and had to assume what they meant, but thought there was something much worse at play after reading the comments. Kinda like "DM" can mean multiple things.

I do agree, though, you can be a pirate and still see the necessity in copyright no matter how warped it currently is, the kind who challenge copyright to change it and not just ignore it, those who try and keep the market healthy in their own unique way.

Though, while having seen some, I'm still unsure how many and how vocal they are on this instance.

EDIT: I guess I did butcher this comment really bad, that's what I get for trying and compress 4 paragraphs down to 2. I'm pretty much trying to say, that while copyright, as it is handled right now, is most definitely counter productive to society, the idea behind it does have some merit. It's not a black/white situation. Furthermore, there exist pirates who also try and care about the market, not necessarily focused on copyright, but simply caring about those whose content they pirate.

I guess it comes down to whether AI should have the same rights as humans, or rather those of a tool.

The idea is not to stop making diffusion art, but to limit it a little, so the tool cannot be used to shamelessly copy a distinctive artists style without consent. Similar limitations would also be healthy for other disciplines, except perhaps those which generally are not considered hobbies or recreation.

And you are right about relevancy to the post, though I think it's good to talk about this as it is a technology which soon will fill a considerable amount of our lives, and the instance kinda focuses on it.

MLAIs need to be trained before they can be used, and the data an MLAI might need depends on the type of AI. The diffusion AIs often rely on artwork which mostly is gathered from artists trying to make a living off of their hobby - the professional "hobby" artists kinda being the forerunners of what many envisioned AI would hopefully lead to in the future.

Now, if we carelessly use these artist's artwork, copyright or not, we might remove or inhibit their ability to live off what they love, which would be a giant blow against those of us fighting for AI as a relief of forced work and enabler of personal freedom.

My concern is therefore, in a world where many use AI without consideration for enshittfication of others lives, do the models often used on dbzer0's communities just scrape the internet of training material, or do those who make and sanitize the datasets ask the artists for permission/use openly available (using the equivalent of the unlicense) material instead?

dbzero0 is a instance which represents copyleft, but my impression is that it also represents the want for more personal control and being able to do whatever one wants. Though, I'm unsure if the general community consensus is to do whatever one wants even at the expense of other common people (everyone for themselves, kinda like the big corps do), or if the community consensus is to do whatever one wants while making sure that others also have the ability to do so (FOSS, commissioning the little man instead of buying from big corps, donating money or labor to small communities instead of being the product of some large social media platform).

I really do like being part of dbzer0, but this question on the instance's stance has held me back from recommending the instance in my circle of friends.

Was just about to say. Apples keep away the doctor, beans keep away anyone else.

It feels like there has not been a whole lot of drama while I've been here. I really like that - the ability to scurry off to the other instances and witness their happenings, and then return to our own little safe haven.

We (as an instance, according to my observations) do appear to have some run-ins with a certain other instance every now and again, but they don't appear too much of an annoyance if you don't interact or engage their taunts.

I love that @[email protected] is also a contributor of fed-related projects. Makes it feel a little more personal.

If I were to note anything bad, it might be that I feel reluctance towards the stable diffusion communities. Mostly because I'm not sure whether their training data is ethically sourced. But that and more is a concern I have regarding AI in general, as automating our hobbies was kinda the opposite many initially wanted it for, namely automating labor so we can instead do our hobbies. Not I can judge anyone automating a hobby, as I'm kinda skimping the edge myself, but we, us who work with MLAI, should generally try and push away from any dystopian futures.

All in all, I'm happy being here. Thank you @[email protected] for providing this space! And for everyone else on this instance, don't forget to appreciate it, either by donations or labor, as that is how we keep such spaces running.

Hey hey hey, don't just go around generalizing. Not all Linux users are like that (but I am, and I use arch BTW).

Like I'm sure we're bound to find at least ONE Linux user who doesn't tell.

Quite the contrary, it's properly structured and leaves no room for misinterpretation, given that the reader can, well, read.

Are you assuming that Google, which, as far as I'm aware, is an international company providing service to a multilingual userbase, has less than 1% non-native English speaking users?

I mean, I don't care much how Google advertises itself, even companies I do like sometimes make an unlucky promotion and that's fine, but I do find the arguments in this comment thread to make some wild assumptions.

That just expands the question: do they not know about other countries?

Many of us have certain connotations with google, and while we know the game in our native language, it's not the first thing we think about when thinking "Google says: I spy".

I'm pretty sure almost no nerds use chatgpt, as chatgpt kinda takes the nerdiness out of the nerd.

Script kiddy might fit better, looking at stackoverflow from the past half year.