Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)G
Posts
94
Comments
1023
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Seems odd that someone from dbzer0 would be very concerned about data ownership. How come?

    I don't exactly know how Perplexity runs its service. I assume that their AI reacts to such a question by googling the name and then summarizing the results. You certainly received much less info about yourself than you could have gotten via a search engine.

    See also: Forer Effect aka Barnum Effect

  • Cn y ndrstnd this?

    You probably can. Human language has built-in redundancy. You can drop parts and still be understood. That's useful for communicating in noisy environments or with people hard of hearing. So you could say that actual information content is less than 1 letter per letter, so to say.

    Properly, information content is measured in bits. A more detailed analysis gives a value of about 1 bit per character.

    Sidenote: You shouldn't ask technical or scientific questions in this community. I don't know why information theory denialism is so hot right now, but it obviously is.

  • The Bit is a unit of information, like the Liter is a unit of volume. The Bit may also be called Shannon, though I do not know where that is commonly done.

    When people talk about a liter, they are often thinking about a liter of milk, or gas. That is, they are thinking of a quantity of a certain substance rather than of a volume in the abstract. People may also say liter to mean a specific carton or bottle, even if it no longer contains a liter of whatever.

    Similarly, people will say "bit" when they mean something more specific than just a unit of measurement. For example, the least significant bit, or the parity bit, and so on. It may refer to a lot of things that can contain 1 Bit of information.

    The fact that the headline is talking about bits/s makes clear that this is talking about how much information goes through a human mind per time unit.

  • Someone who can't tell from the headline what kind of "Bit" is meant is probably not going to be helped by that comment.

  • It's not the same. There's all those lawyers specialized in copyright. Companies that track down "piracy". Then there's rights owners like the Disney corporation or JK Rowling. Rights management firms. Online platforms like Getty or Adobe.

  • If they had heard of it, we'd probably get statements like: "It's just statistics." or "It's not information. It's just a probability."

  • It's a bit like asking what is the difference between the letter "A" and ink on a page in the shape of the letter "A". Of course, first one would have to explain how they are usually not different at all.

    BTW, I don't know what you mean by "external storage data". The expression doesn't make sense.

  • Wrong. They are called the same because they are fundamentally the same. That's how you measure information.

    In some contexts, one wants to make a difference between the theoretical information content and what is actually stored on a technical device. But that's a fairly subtle thing.

  • In all likelihood, it wouldn't be enforced against small fry, but it may be. The fact is that running something like that costs time and money. If what you get in return is legal threats and more demands, maybe you just don't bother anymore.

    What kind of future is there for flouting these laws? GDPR and Article 13 are rarely enforced against small fry, but they are. And all I see, even on lemmy, are demands for more laws and more enforcement. When somebody gets busted, it's their own bloody fault for having ignored the law for years and being so recalcitrant.

  • Yes, that's people. You see such laws being pushed throughout the world and even on lemmy people are full of support. They simply don't understand the technical, social, or economic implications.

  • The only reason you need to know someone's name is to talk about them behind their back.

  • Damn shame. But it is what people want.

  • You can get a lot of things for free by lying. It's called fraud.

    Anyway, preventing rent-seeking on AI training just means that the copyright mafia can't charge you money for what you do with your own property. It doesn't necessarily mean that a copy for training doesn't have to be legally obtained.

  • A few years ago, the EU expanded copyright so that "information service providers" have to get consent to use news articles in any way. So google has obtained licenses but the publishers want more money. Google says it's not worth it. Given how notoriously delusional copyright owners are, I believe google.

  • Turning that on is probably a GDPR violation for those in Europe.

    ETA: Don't shoot the messenger. I won't be suing.

  • I doubt it. There's a good chance that we will see copycat killers. That's a well known phenomenon, but it is not a change in society.

    High-profile events can catalyze changes. Violence has been committed. A person died. That creates a sense of urgency. Americans have discovered that there is a broad consensus that something ought to be done about health care. We'll see.

    But I do not see any appetite for a societal change. Americans look at individuals, not at systemic factors. The USA has, by far, the highest incarceration rate in the world. It costs the taxpayer a lot of money to feed and house all those people, not to mention that the rest of society misses out on all the productive labor they could do. The US likes to punish individuals for perceived wrong-doing, but it does not look at systemic factors.

    US society now wants more bad guy CEOs punished. That's not a change and it will not lead to a change. People aren't even thinking about how the law could be changed to punish these bad guys, or what they personally could do alone or by collective action. They are waiting for heroes.

    Americans want V (for Vendetta) to save them while they watch the show. Many think that Elon Musk is Ironman. That's part of the malaise.

    People want individuals to take care of things and so individuals need the power to do so. Well, billionaires are people who have been given the power to take care of business (excuse the pun). And if they don't do it right, it's because they are greedy or have some other individual flaw.

  • No. Maybe that's just clickbait, or maybe the writers here prefer AI to be the target of the outrage. The complaint has very little to do with AI.

  • The people operating the platform may be fined if they don't moderate according to their local law.

    I've seen people here often cheer for the EU standing up to Big Tech. Well, this, too, is EU regulations.