skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Every human is using the hard work of other humans down through the entirety of history and mostly without credit or attribution.
None us exists in a vacuum and we are all copying each other constantly.

Should students need to attribute the copyrighted textbooks and lessons that they learned from for all their future work?

Should artists attribute every reference they've used? Even if they draw stick figures based on the reference? Even if they only use small parts from multiple references?

What's different from a machine learning something and a human learning it?

I think in terms of practical open source/permissive licenses it makes the most sense for new licenses to be made that include no-training clauses for the rights holders that dislike machine learning.

Dall-E's use of training on non-permissive copyrighted web-scraped data seems more complicated and I imagine there will eventually be lawsuits to figure that out.
Hotline Miami soundtrack is my go to
Perhaps there is a difference between "not wanting to engage on the matter" and "banning someone on sight"? Maybe there's polite ways to say, "Sorry, but we're not interested in supporting docker, and we don't care about any arguments for it" that would take less effort than rudely telling someone to fuck off?
All is takes is sabotage of the nuclear plant, perhaps by those sympathetic to Russia and upset with Germany over their increased defense budget in response to the invasion of Ukraine.
Need to adjust for Puerto Rico's change in something like purchasing power parity since then, not just US inflation, depending on the mix of labor that was involved.
They have a way to change tire inflation to suit the terrain. I wonder if they can change the failsafe direction of the brakes to suit the situation.
To my intuitive mind it is an obvious yes
This does more harm than good. If you set a precedent, then things like stable diffusion will also be illegal since it's trained on public data. OP just wants to make money from microsoft using fearmongering and false sense of righteousness
I suspect we’re going to see so many of these systems mothballed quite soon. I’ve noticed badly printed out menus at some of these places already.
The way I've structured options agreements is that if someone is let go without cause, they get their prorated shares that will vest next. So half way through the year on a one year vest? Give them half the shares. If we fired with cause (which usually requires somewhat egregious behavior and isn't just an employee not working out), then they did not get anything prorated. If they quit, generally we'd also prorate unless they leave us in a lurch. It was setup this way contractually for us, but you could certainly choose to do it this way willingly without the contractual obligation.
The important thing is that you've figured out a way to be superior to both.
Personally I'm not worried about the end user using copyrighted code. That is their responsibility. If you have verbatim GPL code in your commercial closed source code base that is a liability and it might be dangerous to use copilot.

What I have more of a problem with is Microsoft charging for copilot which was trained on copyrighted code without any permission whatsoever which they really have no right to utilize/charge for.
OK, they're using IMPLAN. Stop right there. There's a heap of static world fallacy, failure to acknowledge price trends, built in there.

On the callout: "Maintaining grid reliability would be much less costly if natural gas were used instead of battery storage, but these plants would need to shut down by 2040 under the Walz proposal".

I haven't run the numbers on this. But methane does not have to come from the ground.

By 2040, on current trends, synthesizing methane using air-captured carbon and electrolyzed hydrogen using wind power will be competitive with today's fossil methane cost.
Maybe the software engineers are worried they're being made redundant, but it is super fair for them to not allow their own work to make them redundant without permission
There's room for both in the process. I like these kinds of articles, videos etc. Love finding out how unique sounda and feelings are made.

I regularly have sessions where I attempt to recreate sounds or full songs too. Great learning tool!

But, you also need to jam and be creative.

Too much technical learning without creativity and you make boring stuff. Too much creativity without technical learning and you find it difficult to express yourself.
Caring about licenses, fair use, and copyright has been deeply ingrained in the open source and hacker community for literally decades.
Area code - 867-5309 usually gets the point across.
You misread my comment. I'm simply pointing out that:

1. you can't create aws accounts with prepaid cards

2. the reason why is that aws doesn't accept prepaid cards, because people use them for fraud/spam and they want to stop them.
Ever since I read all the hand wringing about how higher gas & energy prices are regressive & hurt the poor I’ve come to the same viewpoint as you. It’s not like I prefer high energy prices, but in a capitalist system that’s pretty much the system working as designed.
> I only now realized that by using Apple Pay, they get at least my name and email address…

I do not think the merchant gets a name or an email address.

https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/715893
You run search on the text output. Yes I mean that they would search the code. It's certainly legal to show LGPL code snippets along with the license (It may also be legal without this, IANAL).
Nomad is pretty fantastic!
Caring about defending peoples right to fair use has been. Which is the exact opposite of the Luddite reaction to copilot.
How could a banner not be sufficient? Under what legal theory is Copilot + banner illegal, but code search is legal?
As a human, if I learn how to program by studying copyrighted code, is it unethical for me to use that knowledge to make a living ?
I think if we’re going to make up BS like Elon’s ratio, we could at least get it right.

Elons Ratio = litigation / tweet

Don’t be a sycophant, Elon should not be the poster boy for the computational intelligence explosion.
I gave a list of examples. Are you legitimately okay with Ye deciding to distribute all of the following examples:

Child Porn, Revenge Porn, National Defense secrets leaking, instructions for Chlorine Gas masquerading as instructions for making Play-Doh, libel and slander, weaponized disinformation, doxxing, harassment, threats of violence.
I agree. Contracting is great, and no one cares about your age, just what you can do. I've been paid and paid thousands of dollars without ever actually meeting someone in-person.

He should absolutely check his employment agreement, though, and make sure he doesn't:

* use company equipment

* do any work for a competitor

* work on company time

Contracting also is helpful because it is something he can dip his toe into without a large time commitment (as opposed to a job). I'd suggest he reach out to people he has worked with in the past that have left the company (LinkedIn is good, but Facebook might work well too). My go-to phrasing is:

"Hiya, hope you are doing well. <Anecdote, like 'remember when we shipped project X? Guess what, it's still running today'.>

I'm reaching out because I'm looking to do more contracting and to expand my network. In particular, I want to do <the type of work he wants to do>. I'd prefer to do it off hours, about <X hours a week>.

Do you know anyone who is looking for a hand? If you do, or think of anyone, I'd sure appreciate an intro."

This phrasing is far less direct than "Do you need help" but conveys the same message.

He should also think about a rate that he'd work for, as that will likely be one of the first questions any possible client will have.
Using M1 plus the address lines was used to trap on certain addresses on expansion devices for the Spectrum such as Interface 1 or the +D. Then they’d use a line on the expansion bus to disable the standard ROM and substitute their own ROM / static RAM until some other trigger such as an OUT to a port would page the ROM back in.

I guess it’s a short step to looking up memory addresses against a bitmap for validation. I couldn’t tell from the video if this is what he did. Cutting the addresses into pages would let you save or add more levels and I guess you could implement a TLB similarly.
> I do hope for a resolution for MH370 one day but we know the bullet points: it was a deliberate action by the pilot (and/or the co-pilot) to depressurize the plane, run it out into the ocean and (most likely) make a "soft" landing after which it would fill with water and sink. There's alot of evidence for this and no other proposed scenario fits the evidence.

I'm a certified commercial pilot and I'm researched this incident extensively.

That's the most plausible conclusion that I can come to. The precise turning to attempt to evade radar at the start (even the military radars) must have meant extremely precise planning at the start.

There are a lot of other cockpit maneuveurs and flip switching you'd have to go to during this phase but I won't get into that.

You can depressurize it at altitude to kill the passengers and then put it into the furthest reaches of the ocean.

It's a very sad situation all around but I can't find any facts that would point to other alternatives.
Look at all the "tech business model" defenders. Google is their hero. No one is willing to pay for Google. The website user is the product. All the analogies to actual products in the real world that have actual monetary value are wrong. None of us pay anything to Google and we never will. We pay ISPs for internet connections.

https://infolab.stanford.edu/pub/papers/google.pdf

What the "tech" supporters and their hopeless arguments conveniently ignore is that it's possible to have a search engine that does not locate and present ads along with the search results. In fact, that was the original Google. The plan was to avoid the influence of advertising. Why. Because it sucks. An entire Appendix was devoted to this issue. No amount of "tech" hype can change that fact. Computers and computer networks did not and still do not not require advertising to work.
Growing up as a kid who ate a lot of junk food, I think there's just more commonly a culture among less affluent folks to prioritize rewards now instead of rewards later.

Eat, drink, be merry today - you may not have the opportunity tomorrow.

Treating yourself or your kids now is the good life for a lot of people - of course, at the expense of tomorrow, but that's not too much of a concern.

So, a difference in priorities and perspectives among rich vs poor. Like the articles states, but a different view of it.
It was easier back before the mass electrification of everything, because if the local sheriff knew who you were they could vouch to the local DMV and you’d be good to go. Now everything is fraud proof and trickier.

And if you lose your birth certificate you may have to start all over again!

There are ways to get an ID via other methods and then build up but it can be tricky and difficult to navigate. And without a stable address it can be nearly impossible.
Here is my hashed password: Gx5jp2z8,h

Let me know when it has been succesfully decrypted. Or better yet, explain how you can possibly know if a decryption is succesful except by testing it.

You can make 10 test attempts before you're locked out for 1 hour. Another 10 attempts before the account is locked indefinitely.

The number of attempts per second your GPU cluster can make is no longer relevant.
If you go around pasting code ad verbatim, a lot of people would be upset too.
> "only one out of three new hires in 2021" stay with the company for 90 or more days.

This is truly amazing. I'm guessing the warehouse biz has the most effect on this stat, but still. Wow.
> It would be sad if someone succeeded in shutting down CoPilot for this kind of copyright stuff. It is genuinely useful. I don't care that it reproduces copyrighted content.

Sure — in the same way that hacking into a competitor's GitHub account and copying their private source code is "genuinely useful" to you. As the person benefitting from unlawfully using their source code, of course you wouldn't care that it reproduces it. But you're not really the person we're trying to help here.
I know a guy doing this - ex-Typhoon / Tornado pilot, retired. Went over there earlier this year.

The lure to fly fighter planes again was a big draw - plus the massive sack of cash.

He said it wasn't weapons training or even tactics training - really just training them in how to run effective training exercises.

I told him I thought it sounded like the start to a bad 80s action movie plot. He'd been told it was something innocent and then he'd discover he was planning an attack on Taiwan. He and his aging western fighter buddies would have to fight their way out of China with the full might of the China military forces chasing them...
I get the impression that many peoples' grievance with generative AI (text, code, images etc.) isn't _really_ about the data provenance. Or at least, it feels secondary, compared to the general disruptive nature of the tech.

If tomorrow someone released a StableDiffusion, CoPilot etc with the same functionality, but respecting the provenance of the data (i.e. licensing etc), what concrete difference would this make? Programmers and other creative professionals would still (reasonably) be nervous about the implications for their livelihoods and communities.

At some point it will be possible to prompt a model for music in the style of <random artist>, and having never heard <random artist>, the model will generate a convincing emulation, based purely on statistical knowledge gleaned from millions of unrelated songs and text pairs. (I give it 5 years).

Now what? <random artist> should still be concerned (or not), but at least we're talking about the correct issue: How do we co-exist with generative models that massively disrupt/alter the process of doing creative or intellectual work?
Ray Dalio’s recent book takes exactly what you’re talking about and paints an extrapolated picture of how this changes across generations and repeats itself. A good read, even if the information is broad strokes.
Plus the pilot stress of having to adjust to using dramatically different instruments when already in a difficult situation.

It's just not a workable idea in general. There are checklists for stuff like instrument failure which can probably recover from a software bug like this.
As teenagers we protested encryption on DVDs around 1999. A dozen of our local 2600 meetup gathered in front of what is now a Best buy and handed out DeCSS flyers.
>Boeing gets away with this software issue because it's not really a big issue. The scary point the media can tell you because you don't have context to understand why it's mundane.

Yes, like the mundane software overriding pilot's intent from software written specifically to not retrain pilots on the system? Yup, sounds mundane to me.

When I said I don't trust anything from Boeing, it had little to do with this 50 day reboot, but much more in line with the Boeing is allowed to self certify and has been shown to not do that in a good way. They have ruined that trust because of greed. You might think that's a broad brush? At this point, every little bit is just another instance of death from a thousand cuts.
oh my god you hit the nail on the head
Sci-Hub was interesting because until 2021, it could automatically add any article not in its database by querying proxy servers set up at universities that actually subscribed to the journals, which would then download the PDF from the journal’s website and forward it to Sci-Hub. (This was the approach most academics took in the pre-Sci-Hub days; they’d email friends at other universities and ask them if they had access to a given article.)

Sadly, Sci-Hub took down this “magic proxy” to try and win a court case in India, which its creator thinks might legitimize it elsewhere. It’s a huge shame, because it means that many obscure articles are now inaccessible via Sci-Hub.

Ironically, a pure proxy-based Sci-Hub that didn’t host any articles on its own might actually be legal in certain countries, since it’s not actually hosting any copyrighted content itself. It definitely would be a lot easier to host and a lot harder to shut down; indeed, it could be completely decentralized.
I'm curious why this reply got downvoted so much. Can someone explain if the content is correct or not and why?
You're not going to find hundreds of people to staff a legislature (or the tens of thousands that comprise their personal and professional staff) that aren't vulnerable to extortion by disclosing their use of sex workers, drugs, deviant behavior, illicit cash payments to cover up same, etc - nor should you! It's just not going to happen. Furthermore, even if you believe in such systems, you want to optimize for leadership, vision, and fairness, not unextortability. Otherwise you just get a calcified bunch of squares running things.

Any governing body large enough to manage all of the affairs of a country of hundreds of millions or billions of people is going to comprise in the thousands of people, and there will be dirt for the finding on almost all of them. Remember, you don't need actual proof - you just need enough circumstantial evidence that the threat of cancellation/impeachment/resignation/etc is credible.
Unless Microsoft is secretly powering Copilot with Mechanical Turk, that isn't what's happening here.
Sounds like you missed the “actually, all those digital wires are transmission lines” class :)
> I recall this being the case in Palo Alto for city lots at one time and I believe that San Francisco city lots are similarly ordinanced.

Anecdotally this does not seem to be the case any more, I live in the area and have never been ticketed for backing in. I usually don’t park any other way. You know, in case of zombies and I have to leave quickly.

> Unless you know the city, it's safest to park "the standard way”.

Depends on the city. Which requires…knowing the city? Or at least looking about. So I think that dismisses any idea that one should default to nose-in. Just park like everyone else is doing if you’re so worried. Only thing I’ve seen people ticketed for in SF is not curbing their wheels, which, likely you won’t notice or know about if you’re from out of town.

> Furthermore, there is some "unless you do have a backup camera, the backing into a spot between two cars is more difficult than going in forwards and then using the lot space upon leaving to properly orient."

This is only the case if you have never practiced backing up. It’s actually much easier to make precise movements when you’re reversing, due to the front wheel steering. I’m grateful that this was taught to me by my driving course.

> Lastly, if you are to make use of the trunk of the car, most parking lots are set up to allow easier access when not backed in.

This is true. I park nose-in at Costco.
Likewise gas prices, Google increased ad timing on YouTube videos
This reminds me of a Dyson bladeless fan but in "reverse."
> When you upload code to github you give other people the right to fork it... I knew that already. But you license it. You don't give anyone the right to fork it and not abide the license.

you are talking multiple separate things here.

when I upload code to github.com I attest that I have the rights required to do so, and the rights required to grant GitHub the licenses I've agreed to grant it by uploading.

> You don't give anyone the right to fork it and not abide the license.

correct, you can't grant a right to violate the rights granted. users of the code hold the responsibility of acting in accordance with the license.

> So if I fork it, I'm still giving Microsoft rights I don't have, I'm giving them the right to violate the license. That makes it illegal for me to fork it.

no. you did not upload code that you forked from a GitHub.com repository. if you are talking about uploading code that you copied somewhere else, and you're calling that a fork, you have violated the terms by uploading code that you do not have rights to upload. remember, by uploading code to github.com you attest that you have the rights required to do so, according to the terms of service. if you lie, you are responsible for that lie and its consequences.

> Microsoft says I give them the right to violate the license

your premise in this part is flawed. see above.

> Microsoft demands rights I don't have [the right] to give?

by uploading to GitHub.com you attest that you have the ability to grant those rights. If you lied, and you don't have those rights, that's your responsibility and your ass if a law suit comes around because of it.

perfectly sensible to me. GitHub gets to say that they require users to grant the rights in order to upload, and that the users necessarily had the rights to give to GitHub. if a user lied, that is not GitHub's fault; the user entered into a legal agreement saying they had the rights needed.
Big money here. Good luck
> In fact, the U.S. is one of only two countries in the world that allows direct-to-consumer prescription drug ads.

The other being New Zealand. Yeah, It's weird, all right.
Question out of mostly ignorance: why are the network interfaces (is this the right terminology?) set up so that your IP gets set randomly all the time? It seems crazy that we have to treat our IP address as if it's a secret in order to avoid nefarious and commercial actors from correlating our activities and it seems like for casual and consumer computing, changing the IP of the client shouldn't be a problem. I guess I'm asking whether operating systems could/should be configured to randomly change your IP instead of having to rely on a VPN. Am I thinking about this incorrectly?
#000 as your soul
I’d argue that copilot’s core functionality is distributing code, which is very different from search (pointing to original code). Very different from a copyright / fair use perspective.
I thought this was going to be a Twitter ratio
Not everyone worked - it is quite possible to be a young adult without having ever used a computer or phone - rare, but possible.

And even more so in a generation where many women stayed home and didn’t enter the labor market at all, or all those who worked any of the various manual labor jobs. Some restaurants still don’t have digital records of orders, etc to this day.
As an American I totally agree with that. I would never think to include the cross walk lights.

If you asked for “signal lights” I could see it. But not traffic.
It’s mainframes all the way down
Code search may show snippets, but it's clearly not separated from the rest of its code base, including the license. It may be your problem as a user of that tool if you pirate snippets out of the search results without honoring its license, but GitHub at least didn't distribute it without its license. A human judge would surely determine that a search result page showing a snippet and linking back to the project wouldn't constitute distributing the code without attribution. Copilot is a different matter. There is no way to know where the code came from, whether it's novel or verbatim copy of someone's copyrighted work. Microsoft _is_ distributing code snippets here sans its license.
Wouldn't the sub itself also reflect the ping and give itself away?
logitech used to get away with solar cells on the K750. It did sometimes die if left without much light but I was impressed it could operate as well as it did without direct sunlight.
Microsoft used its OS dominance to... solidify its OS dominance?

Does the law really say you can't include a free web browser if someone else created a paid one?

I don't want to live in a world where potential improvements for consumers get companies sued for antitrust.
Has anyone ever looked for silicon based life forms on Earth?