How can you live with yourself?

I think you can zoom in most of the pages with ctrl+ +

It’s not a whoosh if you mention the possibility of them trolling

I don’t know if you guys are on purpose but it’s Fawkes. It would be amazing if three people really had different spellings of the same Guy…

So there is still time…

It does though, their most profitable (as in profit margin) businesses areas are the subscription based services and charging.

https://www.energyandcapital.com/tesla-fsd/#%3A~%3Atext=This+would+result+in+approximately%2Ca+year+from+charging+services.

Mimic, perhaps inspired but neural nets in machine learning doesn’t work at all like real neural nets. They are just variables in a huge matrix multiplication.

FYI, I do have a Master’s degree in Machine Learning.

I disagree. Machines aren’t “learning”. You are anthropomorphising theem. They are storing the original works, just in a very convoluted way which makes it hard to know which works were used when generating a new one.

I tend to see it as they used “all the works” they trained on.

For the sake of argument, assume I could make an “AI” mesh together images but then only train it on two famous works of art. It would spit out a split screen of half the first one to the left and half of the other to the right. This would clearly be recognized as copying the original works but it would be a “new piece of art”, right?

What if we add more images? At some point it would just be a jumbled mess, but still consist wholly of copies of original art. It would just be harder to demonstrate.

Morally - not practically - is the sophistication of the AI in jumbling the images together really what should constitute fair use?

Many licences have different rules for redistribution, which I think is fair. The site is free to use but it’s not fair to copy all the data and make a competitive site.

Of course wikipedia could make such a license. I don’t think they have though.

How is the lack of infrastructure an argument for allowing something morally incorrect? We can take that argument to absurdum by saying there are more people with guns than there are cops - therefore killing must be morally correct.

Just the mods

Yes they are telling you tomorrow.

Some derivatives aim to lower the risk, so the active decision to buy it would be to ungamble then? Or is it just gambling wyen you choose not to buy it?

Do you have insurance on your house or do you gamble that it will be fine without it?

Exactly! Which is why it is mad trying to outlaw or frown upon “gambling” with stocks.

There are many great wxamples in this thread already of why derivatives are necessary to a functioning society.

Wow that got complicated very quickly. Bummer no-one can come up with a simple example of when quicksort is useful.

They don’t, as others have pointed out. It’s just a standard single board computer with some addons and a case.

I disagree. That’s like saying insurance shouldn’t be allowed.

Highly regulated would be anotheratter though.

I think you have a very specific definition of gambling which I don’t share. To me, gambling is much broader. Wikipedia summarizes it well:

“Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize.”

That’s it. It doesn’t make an opinion whether the bet is fair. There doesn’t have to be a casino involved at all. It also doesn’t require you to put “most or your life savings” into it for it to be gambling.

I think you are conflating high risk, high stakes and even the precence of a casino into the same concept and call it gambling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling

That doesn’t make sense at all. How would you - given two stacks of papers - know which stack the correct form is?

Most companies have adapted to that by now. The raise the orice for (at least) rhirty days so that it still looks legit.

The one in your example seems like a failure at that.

You are arguing against yourself. In the first paragraph you say that the parents should keep kids from social media.

In the second, you say that it would be a violation of privacy if parents would keep kids from social media.

Kids need policing, it’s going to need to be done by the parents no matter what the laws are. Personally, I don’t think the laws matter much in this regard.