In ISBNdb’s now-removed marketing materials, it admitted that getting caught destroying printed books during the scanning process would not be a good look. “The optics problem is real,” ISBNdb’s site said. “‘AI company destroys two million books’ is not a headline that generates sympathy.”
So their solution was to do the evil thing secretly?
Any other country would employ people with basic knowledge who would spot this at once. But Trump (with the help of Musk and a handful of fratboys) fired anyone like that. Knowledge, expertise and competence are a negative in their eyes. They want ignorant sycophants only.
No Nambia either. And where’s the Democratic Republic of the Covfefe?
Ah, but would an absolute dipshit say something like this, on the occasion of winning a US military contact?
For Luckey, the contract transition is his own watershed moment. In his blog on Tuesday, he wrote that the announcement is “deeply personal.”
“Everything I’ve done in my career — building Oculus out of a camper trailer, shipping VR to millions of consumers, getting run out of Silicon Valley by backstabbing snakes, betting that Anduril could tear people out of the bigtech megacorp matrix and put them to work on our nation’s most important problems — has led to this moment,” he wrote.
Sends like we have that anyway. Let’s replace them with AI then switch the AI off.
There’s no legitimate purpose for destroying these books.
There are non-invasive ways scan books. But the destruction is an added bonus. These companies make a copy of these public domain books and then pulp the remains. They’re rare, so that means they’re hard to find (that’s what rare means, after all).
Then, they can turn around and sell their dataset to AI companies.
The destruction is the point.
Capitalism always creates perverse incentives. The most profitable thing you can do is seize something readily available and make it impossible to get without paying you.
But which companies are doing this? It sounds like these are companies that supply training data to AI companies. I think we need names.
The problem he sees is that the rest of us still have some.
LLMs are bullshit machines. I dont see how there’s any question.
We all need to communicate better. Yeah the pedophiles!
Hmm
Yes, though I don’t suppose he’ll ever be free of surveillance by various countries’ intelligence agencies.
Maybe they’ll make it a crime not to carry evidence of something they think you should have evidence of.
ICE will be doing its best to provoke an “active public safety threat” wherever it can during the elections. They’ll turn up and start grabbing people out of voting lines, or just threatening people, and as soon as anyone protests it will be an active public safety threat. Then they’ll either shut the polling venue down or cause so much trouble outside that no one dare approach. Once the election is done and there just happened to be active public safety threats in Democratic-leaning areas only, the Democrats will decide they have to play by the rules and accept the result in order to protect democracy.
It’s the Telegraph. The whole thing is a pile of half-assed right-wing nonsense. It’s what happens when a middlebrow Tory propaganda broadsheet dumbs itself right down for the internet in the age of MAGA.
The USA is close, with a two-week concept of a plan.
What a coincidence that it was the guy protesting the police who was also suspected of possessing such materials. If it turns out they had real independent grounds to suspect he had such images, I’ll change this view, but for now I assume that’s the cops’ standard line to shut down people’s questions. Just say they thought the political target had CSAM, and immediately people see him differently, plus the police can accuse anyone who challenges their actions of supporting pedophiles.
Mustn’t evidence be clearly relevant to the suspicion of a crime? If we call anything the police might take an interest in “evidence”, then in principle destroying anything could land you in prison. All the cops would have to do is declare they wanted to see the thing you destroyed.
Behind it is the belief that everyone gets what they deserve, so if you’re wealthy it’s because you’re more deserving of wealth, and if you’re poor, unemployed and hungry it’s because you deserve poverty and hunger. American right-wingers will seldom admit that you can be unemployed or poor through no fault of your own. They don’t seem to allow themselves the concept of a systematic injustice, or even of economic forces causing people to become unemployed. Deep down perhaps they know it happens, but you won’t often catch them admitting it out loud.
This belief that the world rewards people according to their merits and deserts ties in nicely with evangelical Christianity, and the idea that God administers this global rewards system. Why help the poor if God put them there because they deserve to suffer? Might as well buy yourself some luxuries and enjoy your God-given wealth.
It’s not really a philosophy, of course. It’s basic selfishness and greed dressed up as a political philosophy. As a philosophy it obviously doesn’t hold up for five minutes: you can only fail to see the injustice in the world if your eyes are very firmly and resolutely shut. And you can’t believe in investing in the stock market unless you believe there’s an economy with booms and busts and people winding up unemployed due to forces beyond their control. But they won’t admit it.
Their behaviour proves that they don’t really hold principled beliefs, but are just improvising to make peace with their own selfishness. As soon as they themselves fall on hard times, their professed beliefs no longer apply and it’s everyone’s fault but theirs. As soon as they get a sniff of power, their professed love of guns to fight tyranny turns into an eagerness to use guns to impose tyranny. They live by no principle except craven selfishness.
Maybe he was born in 1969 and started coding at 6 months old.
Me too. I wonder what I said to earn my place there.
Because someone has to pay for the storage and bandwidth, which is hugely expensive. To fund it they’d have to charge subscriptions or run ads, same as Google.