Alt. Profile @Th4tGuyII

  • 0 Posts
  • 70 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2024

help-circle

  • Th4tGuyII@fedia.ioto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonePony Rule
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Particularly for physical injuries, I sometimes prefer to suffer as it reminds me that I need to be careful, which I know I’d forget if I subdued the pain.

    Having said that, for things like flu’s where it’s just pure suffering for nothing, I’ll suck down as many painkillers as I can have in a day.



  • The goals of the war being?..

    Oh right, the destruction of every non-Israeli living in Gaza.

    • Why else would they go after Hospitals treating innocent Palestinian victims?

    • Why else would they spend months and months denying any and all foreign aid to Gaza after cutting them off from all food, water, and electricity?

    • Why else would they airstrike clearly marked aid convoys for Gaza going along a pre-agreed route?

    • Why else would members of the IDF record thselves killing innocent Palestinians?

    • Why else would they oppose any and all peace deals, and openly plot to betray any and all ceasefires?

    Israel has killed more than 30,000 innocent people. You can’t just call that collateral or even callous disregard, it’s mass murder, a genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

    Hamas are not good guys by any stretch, but if you’re being morally high-grounded by a terrorist organisation, then you ought to know which side of history you’re on.

    Edit: Israeli not Israelite


  • The idea of copyright itself isn’t a bad thing IMO - reward creatives by allowing them exclusivity over their works for an amount of time sufficient to recoup costs and make some profit.

    Problem is monopolistic mega-corporations screwed it all up in the name of profits by extending copyright decades past its original intention, and by copyrighting not just the works but even the means of accessing any of them.

    It’s no secret that the reuse of public domain inspirations was how many of the largest entertainment companies and largest publishers got to where they are, so of course they pulled the ladder to ensure it’d be a whole lot harder to follow them.

    Copyright is broken, and you only need follow the money to see who broke it.











  • So providing a fine-tuned model shouldn’t either.

    I didn’t mean in terms of providing. I meant that if someone provided a base model, someone took that and but on of it, then used it for a harmful purpose - of course the person modified it should be liable, not the base provider.

    It’s like if someone took a version of Linux, modified it, then used that modified version for a similar person - you wouldn’t go after the person who made the unmodified version.


  • SB 1047 is a California state bill that would make large AI model providers – such as Meta, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Mistral – liable for the potentially catastrophic dangers of their AI systems.

    Now this sounds like a complicated debate - but it seems to me like everyone against this bill are people who would benefit monetarily from not having to deal with the safety aspect of AI, and that does sound suspicious to me.

    Another technical piece of this bill relates to open-source AI models. […] There’s a caveat that if a developer spends more than 25% of the cost to train Llama 3 on fine-tuning, that developer is now responsible. That said, opponents of the bill still find this unfair and not the right approach.

    In regards to the open source models, while it makes sense that if a developer takes the model and does a significant portion of the fine tuning, they should be liable for the result of that…

    But should the main developer still be liable if a bad actor does less than 25% fine tuning and uses exploits in the base model?

    One could argue that developers should be trying to examine their black-boxes for vunerabilities, rather than shrugging and saying it can’t be done then demanding they not be held liable.