Ok, but AI isn’t going away. So if these companies stop serving open access, the ONLY people that will use them will be the people who can afford the server/processing time.
This article isn’t about usefulness of the models to normal people. It’s about profitability of the models to the corporations that serve them.
Paying close attention is ironically very important if you’re interested in foraging
No need to try again. They already are implementing additional costs. 2 steps forward, 1 step back.
You may underestimate the amount of money the Saudi government has
It’s what lonely humans crave!
… what?
This sounds like the pitch of a tech bro who just heard someone use the term API but doesn’t actually know what it is
I assume you looked up if it was correct to be able to say that does know the answer. In that case, why did you bother with ChatGPT?
Never take anything generative AI produces as factual unless you check it. It is not designed to produce factual information and is very often wrong and confidently incorrect.
For the love of… stop using generative AI to give you answers to questions! If it doesn’t have an answer it just makes it up completely.
It took long because you’re on the free tier and you were rate limited. The idea that a human is writing your answer is so laughably absurd I genuinely don’t know if you’re serious.
This song immediately popped into my head after seeing them
The LLM isn’t the issue here. It’s generating coherent speech well enough.
The problem is that there is no mechanism for identifying odd or out of place items in the stimuli fed to the model. This mechanism (separate from the LLM) would be placed between the CNN (image recognizer) and the LLM (text generator). What typically happens is the CNN recognizes subjects and items in an image and passes the list along to the LLM which generates a description. Since the LLM doesn’t actually have access to the original image, you can’t ask it to look for unusual things the CNN did not provide it.
The result is not surprising. People just don’t know how these models work and so assume they can do anything.
If TikTok doesn’t allow you to download their videos and share them outside of their website, based on the EULA agreed to when you made your account, then yes it’s piracy. Justifiable piracy, but still piracy.
(I have no idea if TikTok allows this)
While you have a point, the emulator scene is untested and legally dubious.
There is nothing dubious about copyright infringement. Doing what Sony did would easily be considered abusing the legal system and no judge would stand for it.
Which they would definitely win.
Even if it’s based on the existing song, parody and sampling precedent make it clearly free use. However the creator definitely owns copyright on the specific creation.
It’s not ok for Bob to go after you with a rifle because threatening someone with a weapon is illegal by itself. Firing someone is not
That would be great, but it would lead to people not being as engaged in the site: the entire point of this corporate-sponsored research
… you’re worried about censorship so you use the Chinese search engine?
Just use DuckDuckGo
It’s far easier to be successful if you’re already rich.
And a certain percentage of innocent people are found guilty. You don’t see how expanding the arrests of innocent people is a bad thing? It has the potential to ruin lives
Sounds like a disingenuous argument.
If you’re a content creator and you can leave, you should. If you can’t, well obviously you shouldn’t yet.