It is best to assume that any private US company is compromised in this way
I would say that’s ridiculous for most people, but I guess it entirely depends on your threat model… if you’re legitimately worried about state-level boogeymen, you’ve probably got bigger problems and already know all of this.
So then it’s not really a blanket “no-AI” rule if it can’t be enforceable if it’s good enough? I suppose the rule should have been “no obviously bad AI” or some other equally subjective thing?
It’s not, labels were always written that way. They went into a box where the slide was facing down so the label was always visible at the top.
besides uncompressing itself, there will be other info that is needed at runtime that requires dynamic memory allocation beyond the size of the kernel itself, like hardware/memory maps, framebuffers, filesystem/networking stuff, caches etc.
How is AI-generated content detected and what is the process for disputing such claims?
Besides the fact that I highly doubt this will ever pass…
I think if it did, it would greatly increase the adoption of decentralized platforms.
If websites become responsible for user-generated content, they will just refuse to allow user-generated content in the first place, leading to an explosion in alternative services that are not beholden to the actions of one company that could be compelled to act a certain way.
If your worried about us intelligence monitoring traffic then it’s not a good fit
source:
Highly inflammatory clickbait title IMO
They have already been arresting people for using VPNs: https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/man-booked-for-using-vpn-in-j-ks-rajouri-3rd-such-case-in-2-days-5612508
I certainly wouldn’t call that pixel perfect either though.
Wouldn’t an exact replica be technically illegal?
you’re using alpine+docker with systemd?
In their eyes, probably not… but you can’t have it both ways. Either you let companies take advantage of you, or you don’t…
I wonder if a dual-licensed non-commercial + paid commercial approach could work, but from my experience with FOSS developers, they tend to view non-commercial licenses as sacrilege…
Open source is the very worst thing currently going on because it is so incredibly exploitative, it’s far more exploitative than any actual company is of the workers who work at the company.
Even the people who are getting paid in open source are getting massively underpaid to do it compared to how much the people who are using their code are making, it’s nothing compared to the power that is accreted by the people who have co-opted that work thanks to the open source model. And then mark zuckerberg gets to define how the internet works despite having paid for almost none of the software that his company actually needed to make that work.
It’s like feudalism or serfdom, these people did the work and got nothing for it. It’s like you took the worst aspects of capitalism for workers and the worst aspects of socialism for workers and put them together, that’s open source. You get no power and you get no money.
It’s exploitative whether the people chose to be exploited, just because someone chooses to let you exploit them does not mean that you didn’t exploit them. And for the record that’s how most exploitation works; convincing people to do something that turns out to be very bad for them and very good for you, and that’s exactly what the open source movement has turned out to be.
I really don’t see the “we post stuff on github under a gpl2 or lgpl or apache or mit license”, all that is to me now is just exploitation. You can say that there’s solutions but until someone demonstrates that those solutions work, it’s the standard “real communism has never been tried” argument. AGPL is the only thing that I’ve seen so far that’s an attempt to fix these fundamentally unfair compensation practices.
it’s giving me GIMPshop flashbacks