JieJie

Panpsychism is what you get if materialism can't be proven. Sure, maybe there is a neural correlate of consciousness, but there is no proof of it. If no neural (or perhaps quantum?) correlate can be found, it would perhaps fall on panpsychism as the default explanation.

These folks^0 put money on it, and panpsychism is winning so far.

0: https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2023/07/12/a-25-year-old-bet-on...

It's because they were whispering.

https://openai.com/research/whisper

Didn't Google have a chatbot locked up in a lab somewhere^0, long before ChatGPT?

0: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jun/12/google-en...

It's not so much the folks who suck it up and carry on, though they might be doing themselves a long-term disservice; it's the ones who project it outwards that are doing most of the harm in the world. Boys and girls, of course.

Precedent in the US is very much on the side of the person, not the method.

Whether the Xerox photocopier, the Sony Betamax or (so far) generative AI, judges are ruling that the fault in using technology to infringe copyright doesn't lie in the technology, but the way the technology is used by a person.

Generative AI isn't (yet) a person, so it is neither capable of creating copyrightable works, nor in itself infringing copyright.

I wrote a research paper on it, if you're interested.

https://www.zipbangwow.com/intellectual-impropriety/

"The blame should always go to the party who violated the law in creating the content."

This, this, a thousand times this.

Gift link:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/technology/news-media-ind...

Sure, but does it pass the Selective Attention Test?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo

(I don't know, I don't have access.)

I would definitely opt-in to those robocalls. I guess it's the difference between opt-in and opt-out for me, not that there aren't useful cases.

Personally, I would have preferred the FCC simply ban all unsolicited robocalls, regardless of their origin.

We are living high on tech money. If/when a crash comes, it'll all come tumbling down and we'll look like New York City in the '70s.

It's any-party-in-power's job to make sure that doesn't happen, by any means necessary.

Blackstone's Ratio: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_ratio

The list of canned statements^0 about the dangers of piracy reminds me of Sinclair Broadcasting's famous memo to newsrooms^1.

^0:

> Apparently, there’s quite a bit of copying going on, as SEC filings from several companies include identical passages.

> Netflix: “In light of the compelling consumer proposition, piracy services are subject to rapid global growth”

> Triller Corp: “In light of the compelling consumer proposition, piracy services are subject to rapid global growth”

> FuboTV: “In light of the compelling consumer proposition, piracy services are subject to rapid global growth” > Redbox Entertainment: “In light of the compelling consumer proposition, piracy services are subject to rapid global growth”

> IMAQ: “In light of the compelling consumer proposition, piracy services are subject to rapid global growth” CuriosityStream: “In light of the compelling consumer proposition, piracy services are subject to rapid global growth”

> We don’t know where these references originate. Netflix has mentioned it for a while, that’s for sure, and apparently, the use of this language is widespread and subject to rapid global growth."

1: https://youtu.be/C-4HOgULcd8

Their reasoning for not using tools or browsing from the "Limitations" section:

"No GPT-4 tool usage: Due to our security measures, the GPT-4 models we tested were used without any tools, such as Advanced Data Analysis and Browsing. Enabling the usage of such tools could non-trivially improve the usefulness of our models in this context. We may explore ways to safely incorporate usage of these tools in the future."

I guess I figured it was written by Kultgen with the help from ChatGPT? It would have been a noteworthy feat for a built-from-scratch-by-training-on-MADtv-episodes foundation model was capable of generating the Carlin video at the click of a button. That’s still obvious to the average person, isn’t it? Maybe not? (And is that officially the world we live in now?)

Anyhoo. Still fair use, and even more so. A joke doesn’t have to rise to a certain level of hilarity to deserve 1st A. protection.

Even when, especially when, the joke is on us.^0

0: https://www.npr.org/2022/10/04/1126773469/onion-supreme-cour...

I get that most everyone these days is freaked out about AI. There is a lot of smoke and very little fire here.

If the voice actor in question here has the option of hiring a lawyer and suing the company for wrongful use of his image. He's a professional voice actor and there is quite a bit of legal precedent^1 on his side. If they're making money off his voice/image, he has every right to sue to have all that cash transferred to his bank account, plus damages for theft of opportunity.

If they're doing it, not as quid pro quo, but instead as a marketing gimmick to sell their product, well there is legal precedent on his side as well.

If they're giving it away, though, isn't that just the same as fan fiction? Do we really want to crack down on what is essentially a fan site? Is that the precedent you want to set? It could actually drive more business to the real guy: Maybe he can strike a deal with someone to sell the rights to his voice for whatever he can get for it? Maybe this actually drives up his ability to bargain for a higher price?

Please don't let shortsighted defense of the unknown prevent you from seeing the opportunities presented.

0: https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-anot...

It is a shame that the concepts of "treated equally" and "are equal" are so close, but so far away.

P.S. Thanks for going out on a limb and sharing your valid experience.

I absolutely positively agree. In my experience, racism is a symptom of ignorance, which is cured by intelligence.

Natalie Wynn's video^0 on incels always struck me as uniquely useful, not just for exploring their genesis and radicalization, but in generating empathy for those who suffer from it.

0: https://youtu.be/fD2briZ6fB0

This seems like it would signal good things for AI alignment, don't you think? It leads me to believe that if someone wanted to make a "bad" AI, they would have to build a corpus of "bad" literature: nothing but Quentin Tarantino movies, Nabokov's Lolita, GG Allin songs, and Integer BASIC programs. I doubt that would make a very useful chatbot.

[Edit: Though, I did find this recent article in Rolling Stone, that includes a link to a Gab post that seems like they managed. TLDR: They used open source models and fine tuning.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/nazi-chatbots-meet... ]

Maybe this, since it has to do with Colorado River water.

https://www.watereducation.org/aquapedia/mexico-and-colorado...

According to the author's Linkedin[0], Altway Insurance LLC and BlueNote AI LLC.

[0]https://www.linkedin.com/in/brendan-mccord/

Many comments suggest this won't be useful technology in that it will be easily circumvented for nefarious purposes. Would you mind commenting on your perception of the potential of this particular implementation of the technology you helped create?

My favorite bit, "Threats quickly lost their power when you realized nobody at any point had asked your name or any information about yourself. It's hard to threaten an anonymous person."

I'm working on a business degree to try to get back into the economy myself, so when I find out the answer to your questions, I'll let you know. I suspect the answer is very complicated and difficult to implement, but there is sufficient worldwide desire for some outcome that both supports the poor and disabled while not over-encumbering the rest of society in supporting us.

As one of the people impacted by losing the $150 a month extra SNAP (food stamp) money we were getting throughout the pandemic, inflation was barely noticeable while we were getting it. The effects of inflation became most noticeable when the extra $150 a month was ended, because the inflated prices never went down when the inflationary pressure was removed.

Maybe OP can burn any science fiction books they find in billionaires houses?

Did you watch Arrival or read "Story of Your Life"?

We're still in Act I. Have some popcorn and enjoy the show.