Neither is required, the statement is subjective so without a qualifier it is implied to be one’s own thoughts. Adding either is just flare.
Neither is required, the statement is subjective so without a qualifier it is implied to be one’s own thoughts. Adding either is just flare.
Explain how they make money buying property?
Landlords inflate prices of property.
Most politicians in the West don’t actually care about humanitarian issues in China. That has almost nothing to do with why we don’t play nice.
The liver is one of the most complex organs in the human body. It is responsible for a wide spectrum of toxin breakdown and chemical synthesis. The heart only needs to pump blood, though it’s uptime is very impressive. If your liver stops working you won’t die immediately but if your heart stops working your body will be starved of oxygen in mere minutes. Ultimately though what the heart does is mechanical and simple.
Hair tie. I always have 1, or 2, or 3 in my pocket.
Something like Microsoft Word or Paint is not generative.
It is standard for publishers to make indemnity agreements with creatives who produce for them, because like I said, it’s kinda difficult to prove plagiarism in the negative so a publisher doesn’t want to take the risk of distributing works where originality cannot be verified.
I’m not arguing that we should change any laws, just that people should not use these tools for commercial purposes if the producers of these tools will not take liability, because if they refuse to do so their tools are very risky to use.
I don’t see how my position affects the general public not using these tools, it’s purely about the relationship between creatives and publishers using AI tools and what they should expect and demand.
Those analogies don’t make any sense.
Anyway, as a publisher, if I cannot get OpenAI/ChatGPT to sign an indemnity agreement where they are at fault for plagiarism then their tool is effectively useless because it is really hard to determine something in not plagiarism. That makes ChatGPT pretty sus to use for creatives. So who is going to pay for it?
What vegan thinks you can turn a cat vegan? That’s like thinking you can turn a cat hegelian or something.
While I agree that using copyrighted material to train your model is not theft, text that model produces can very much be plagiarism and OpenAI should be on the hook when it occurs.
It’s not hypocritical to care about some parts of copyright and not others. For example most people in the foss crowd don’t really care about using copyright to monetarily leverage being the sole distributor of a work but they do care about attribution.
You’re asking the wrong question.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_the_United_States
Then shouldn’t it either be changed to “of any cause” or terminate after “dying”.
LLMs don’t “know” anything. The true things they say are just as much bullshit as the falsehoods.
Who’s labor?
I can’t imagine it doing much. Samuels is a joke, Omar has no serious competition and neither does Klobuchar. It’s unfortunate because despite what you think about these politicians, competition is a good thing to prevent stagnation.
I don’t need the acrimonious screeds of a racist incel to tell me how language should function. I communicate daily, in English, both on and offline, and have yet to witness this breakdown of communication you’re decrying.
Unless he paid for it I don’t see how the two things are remotely equivalent. I’d take someone having thousands of vile images on their computer over someone who abused a child or animal even once.
It takes a village to raise a child, not a “mother” and “father” specifically. I do not idolize the hetero nuclear family.