Wasn’t he just posting memes of her two weeks ago? lol. He’s jilted.

But why would someone advertise on Truth Social over Facebook?

Because I could sell star spangled shit on a shingle to that lot for a premium.

Nope. No idea how that works. I assume someone rich says they’ll donate a million bucks to match smaller donors, but I really don’t have a clue what it’s supposed to mean.

I donated $25, and then another $15 with a 4x match (got that email after) just to send my approval of the debate performance. That’s on top of $25 at 3x earlier.

All of that after being out of work for 5 months. It’s not much, but it’s what I could do. That’s not meant to brag. We can’t have Trump.

People are big mad that Springfield didn’t find pet-eating Haitians when demanded by Trump.

I won’t trust it until I read it in his obituary. Until then he’s going to be claiming stolen election every single day.

They are scared of younger swift fans who weren’t planning on voting at all.

Irony, thy name is Vance.

Good for Harris, but flag NSFW.

He has concepts of plans.

They weren’t even from earth.

They should just fly it out of the environment.

Both sides can definitely be bad. It’s like when Google and MS sue each other. I don’t care who wins, I just want them to hurt each other.

Do you have the connections to run a dryer in your bathroom? In the US, you’d need 240v electric or a gas supply which aren’t commonly found in a bathroom. Also an exterior vent.

I suggest a combo washer/dryer which runs on 120v and uses a heat pump for drying. They are quite expensive in comparison to just a dryer, but can be used anywhere you have water and a drain and the total cost would likely be less than having 240v run to the bathroom.

Or maybe you live somewhere where this isn’t so, in which case disregard this.

It sounds like you are describing a blog. If you want to stay in the fediverse, there is WriteFreely. I have an account on paper.wf, but I haven’t used it yet tbh.

I agree with you almost 100% (except the copyright stuff), but,

The biggest source of resistance is people fearing for their jobs. That said, a lot of them have never actually tried AI, so they don’t know the limitations and why I doubt serious businesses will replace any serious creative work for years to come

…the business owners are just as ignorant. They are trying to replace people with AI, which will disrupt our lives while the CEOs refuse to admit their error and force us all to deal with it anyway. It’s a lot like outsourcing. It’s not as cheap and effective as businesses hoped, customers largely hate it, and we’re still doing it anyway.

AI will be disruptive, but over the long term it will settle down to a small disruption. But the journey to get there might suck a bit.

What is your degree to you? A means by which to qualify for a job? Or the lens through which you perceive and shape the world around you for the better?

Because AI might some far-flung day make the former obsolete, but I don’t think ever the latter.

You made a lot of points here. Many I agree with, some I don’t, but I specifically want to address this because it seems to be such a common misconception.

It does and it doesn’t discard the original. It isn’t impossible to recreate the original (since all the data it gobbled up gets stored somewhere in some shape or form and can be truthfully recreated, at least judging by a few comments bellow and news reports). So AI can and does recreate (duplicate or distribute, perhaps) copyrighted works.

AI stores original works like a dictionary does. All the words are there, but the order and meaning is completely gone. An original work is possible to recreate by randomly selecting words from the dictionary, but it’s unlikely.

The thing that makes AI useful is that it understands the patterns words are typically used in. It orders words in the right way far more often than random chance. It knows “It was the best of” has a lot of likely options for the next word, but if it selects “times” as the next word, it’s far more likely to continue with, “it was the worst of times.” Because that sequence of words is so ubiquitous due to references to the classic story. But over the course of following these word patterns, it will quickly glom onto a different pattern and create a wholly new work from the original “prompt.”

There are only two cases in which an original work should be duplicated: either the training data is far too small and the model is overtrained on that particular work, or the work is the most derivative text imaginable lacking any flair or originality.

Adding more training data makes it less likely to recreate any original works.

I am aware of examples where it was claimed an LLM reproduced entirely code functions including original comments. That is either a case of overtraining, or far too many people were already copying that code verbatim into their own, thus making that work very over represented in the training data (same thing, but it was infringing developers who poisoned the data, not researchers using bad training data).

Bottom line: when created with enough data, no original works are stored in any way that allows faithful reproduction other than by chance so random that it’s similar to rolling dice over a dictionary.

None of this means AI can do no wrong, I just don’t find the copyright claim compelling.