Hello, tone-policing genocide-defender and/or carnist 👋

Instead of being mad about words, maybe you should think about why the words bother you more than the injustice they describe.

Have a day!

  • 2 Posts
  • 353 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle



  • The problem isn’t isn’t solved by Biden or Harris being “strong” on the border, because it is the wrong problem.

    The real problem is that democrats have accepted the right-wing framing on immigration, by laundering the far-right narrative that there is a border crisis and putting forward a far-right immigration bill that would give the president unilateral power to shut down the border.

    Them capitulating to this narrative lends validity to patently racist propaganda, like we’re seeing with Haitian migrants and the “Venezuelan gangs” story.

    Aside from the fact that demonizing minority groups being a morally disgusting thing to do, it’s really stupid political strategy for the democrats. Voters that are preoccupied with brown people coming into the country will vote overwhelmingly for Repugs every single time. Democrats will not be able to win over those people racists by trying to out-righting the Republicans.





  • Thanks for sharing the actual license text.

    To me, this stinks of companies knowing that if they’re actually required to reproduce the data, they’ll get hit with copyright infringement or other IP-related litigation. Whereas if they can just be trusted to very honestly list their sources, they can omit the sources they weren’t authorized to steal and reproduce content from, they can get away with it.

    I think that, in practice, this means that the industry standard will be to lie and omit the incriminating data sources, and when someone tries to reproduce the model they won’t actually be able to, but they also won’t be able to easily prove one way or another if data was withheld.

    Really, what should (but won’t) happen, is that we should fix our broken IP laws and companies should be held to account for when they engage in behavior that would be prosecuted as piracy or Computer Fraud and Abuse if you or I did it.

    AI is pretty much the epitome of companies getting to act with impunity in the eyes of the law and exerting that power over everyone else, and it’s annoying to see it get a blessing from an “open source” organization.


  • “The new definition requires Open Source models to provide enough information about their training data so that a ‘skilled person can recreate a substantially equivalent system using the same or similar data,’ which goes further than what many proprietary or ostensibly Open Source models do today,” said Ayah Bdeir, who leads AI strategy at Mozilla.

    Garbage. What this says to me is that they’re going to allow companies that create models that were trained on data that would be illegal for you and me to scrape and regurgigate, to keep the data to themselves as long as they “provide enough information” for someone else that lacks the resources or legal impunity that companies have to theoretically re-steal the data. Which, you know, means that the models won’t be reproducible by any reasonable standard, and can’t actually be called open source.

    But the OSI is just a handful of companies in a trenchcoat, so I’m not surprised by what they would call “open”.







  • I think tankies say some pretty stupid shit too, but you shouldn’t doxx people. I think the link to their presumed employer is a step too far.

    Also, being a “well-paid software engineer” and a Marxist is only contradictory if you don’t understand what Marxism is. Unless you are a part of the bourgeoisie (being well-paid is not the same thing), being a Marxist is a perfectly reasonable position to have.

    The real problem is that many of the “”“Marxists”“” on this site seem to be more interested in American Diabolism and doing apologia for a different set of genocides (the few that America opposes).

    Regardless, it’s bad to doxx people.