But the article is about AI-generated images, so I believe anything that gets spat out from the result of a prompt (even a prompt with an image input) should be tagged. Starting with the biggest companies, of course.
Are you sure about 14 years of support? I think Graphene basically supports things as long as Google does, due to reliance on their source code releases. Double that would be impressive.
For purposes of this article, "open weights model" just means "you can run it on your computer instead of someone else's cloud".
Anthropic, meanwhile...
...sells controlled access to centrally hosted models. A regulatory system built around expensive pre-release evaluations, continuous usage monitoring, identity verification, and revocable access naturally favours large providers of proprietary models. Anthropic already possesses the compliance, legal, and evaluation infrastructure needed to satisfy such a regime. A university lab, startup, or community does not, even if they somehow manage to train a sufficiently capable model.
So it's very clear that regularly capture (and more broadly, capture of the consumer market on thinking thoughts) is the goal.
I don't think you understand their point. The point is that the OCR can be done on a distributed system, because a distributed system is what the cameras already are.
My biggest contention with this claim is whether the computers onboard the license plate readers are actually capable of doing this with solar power and battery capacity, but considering I'd rather they didn't exist anyway...
Dozens of times so far. And the perpetrators point at each other, or simply refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing.
Edit: found the story I was thinking of! This guy was wrongfully added to these lists, and the sheriff only removed him locally after the news stated investigating. And that's only for one county, so the problem will repeat if he drives to a different county.
Probably because Reddit has lawyers, and money, and a little willingness to lock down their content. Unlike individual creators, they can actually file a lawsuit
Presuming they took all the data, a one-time deal would only be good if knowledge gathering actually stopped after the cutoff year- but for recent things like tech and news, the models have to keep learning and adding to their repositories.
The returns on that value sharply diminish, of course, but I think they're still necessary. Which will leave everybody in a bind that is very funny.
Anthropic said that in each of these cases “Claude was explicitly told by our prompt that it had no internet access.”
So the lack of an "isolated test environment" was literally their fault. They left the door open, and was surprised when the genius web crawler couldn't distinguish between an internal page and an external page based on any context clues.
Maybe there’s two mistakes here: 1: the user made the chat public and 2: Maybe Anthropic didn’t have their robots.txt file set correctly?
Basically yes to #2, which was a big mistake on Anthropic's part, but #1 is still unclear about how Google could have ended up there. Putting the chats on a Google-indexed page would make the most sense (and mostly absolve Google from responsibility), but who would be doing that and where?
Tinfoil hat: I wonder if Google was crawling through emails and also made a mistake of their own.
Friend is leaning hard into "all press is good press" and it shows. I've heard an interview with at least one tech reviewer who tried this thing out and, unsurprisingly, it was absolute garbage.
I've never heard of this used anywhere else, but take that with a grain of salt
I'd say yes, lol
But the article is about AI-generated images, so I believe anything that gets spat out from the result of a prompt (even a prompt with an image input) should be tagged. Starting with the biggest companies, of course.