Tja. In den linken Spaces gehen Leute rum und warnen, dass man sich vor dem KI-Scraping schützen muss, wegen Datenschutz und Kapitalismus. Und jetzt werden irgendwie rechtslastige Medien als Quellen bevorzugt. Schlau eingefädelt.
I was misremembering. Google won the precedent, when they were suing over Google Books. IA had only 1 big lawsuit and were forced to settle. The non-destructive scanning is dicey.
Copyright. They mustn't make a copy. There is legal precedent that confirms it's okay to transform the copy you bought into digital format. The Internet Archive relies a lot on that. I think they actually litigated it in the first place. So that's why the copyright heads are going so absolutely apeshit. If no one's charging you rent for using some data, then it's "unethical".
Ok, aber wenn du mit dem anderen Bericht nicht gut findest (zu Recht), warum suchst du dann nicht einen Besseren?
Das Zitat hier so zusammenhanglos zu Posten ist nur verwirrend. Ich habe den Link nur gelesen, weil ich wissen wollte wie blöde das eigentlich berichtet wird. Oft würde ich mir nicht mehr die Mühe machen, wenn ich so ein Zitat im Thread sehe und auf andere Quellen ausweichen.
I'm not sure how much sense this makes for European citizens. What the commission wants is that Google should direct more users to European competitors rather than its own services. For example regarding price comparison sites. The major German competitor is Idealo, owned by right-wing media empire Axel Springer. Some of this seems to be only about serving the interests of our European oligarchs.
Yes, but that only puts an upper limit on the price that anyone would be willing to pay.
It's like this: Both companies estimate how much money they expect to make from using those servers for their own purposes. In Mistral's case, that might be a negative amount. Regardless, Microsoft obviously can put the capacity to better use. So they can offer to rent it from Mistral for more than Mistral believes it can make on its own. Basically, MS passes on some of their profits to Mistral.
Continental Europe had worse copyright laws since the 19th century. The US founding fathers were enlightenment age idealists, hence the copyright clause. European copyright laws were created by authoritarian empires. It's a major reason why we can't do tech. And I suspect also why Europe can't answer to the dominance of US culture.
Legal theft like the Mickey-Mouse-Protection-Law is controversial in the US. In the EU, it goes by without comment. That ends up giving casual observers an exactly reverse impression of the legal and social situation. Same for a lot of issues.
Tja. In den linken Spaces gehen Leute rum und warnen, dass man sich vor dem KI-Scraping schützen muss, wegen Datenschutz und Kapitalismus. Und jetzt werden irgendwie rechtslastige Medien als Quellen bevorzugt. Schlau eingefädelt.
Persönlich oder Bekannte? Wie fühlt sich das an im Vergleich zu Fediverse Social Media oder Videospielen?
Danke für's Feedback.
Kennt hier jemand Leute, die mit Plattformen ähnliche Probleme wie mit zB Nikotin hatten?
I was misremembering. Google won the precedent, when they were suing over Google Books. IA had only 1 big lawsuit and were forced to settle. The non-destructive scanning is dicey.
Copyright. They mustn't make a copy. There is legal precedent that confirms it's okay to transform the copy you bought into digital format. The Internet Archive relies a lot on that. I think they actually litigated it in the first place. So that's why the copyright heads are going so absolutely apeshit. If no one's charging you rent for using some data, then it's "unethical".
Mehr Details von Huggingface: https://huggingface.co/blog/agent-intrusion-technical-timeline
Boys need good, male role models.
https://jfrog.com/blog/jfrog-and-openai-collaboration-on-zero-day-security-findings/
https://huggingface.co/blog/agent-intrusion-technical-timeline
Alles gut! Wenn möglich, kopier bei sowas bitte den Link dazu. Dann versteh ich wie's gemeint ist.
Hier haben wir den AI Act. Also alles gut.
Ok, aber wenn du mit dem anderen Bericht nicht gut findest (zu Recht), warum suchst du dann nicht einen Besseren?
Das Zitat hier so zusammenhanglos zu Posten ist nur verwirrend. Ich habe den Link nur gelesen, weil ich wissen wollte wie blöde das eigentlich berichtet wird. Oft würde ich mir nicht mehr die Mühe machen, wenn ich so ein Zitat im Thread sehe und auf andere Quellen ausweichen.
Das Zitat kommt in dem Link nicht vor.
I tried to come up with a mildly funny title but... gestures helplessly at title
Sorry.
I'm not sure how much sense this makes for European citizens. What the commission wants is that Google should direct more users to European competitors rather than its own services. For example regarding price comparison sites. The major German competitor is Idealo, owned by right-wing media empire Axel Springer. Some of this seems to be only about serving the interests of our European oligarchs.
The EU's AI Act calls them open source, so that ship has sailed.
Yes, but that only puts an upper limit on the price that anyone would be willing to pay.
It's like this: Both companies estimate how much money they expect to make from using those servers for their own purposes. In Mistral's case, that might be a negative amount. Regardless, Microsoft obviously can put the capacity to better use. So they can offer to rent it from Mistral for more than Mistral believes it can make on its own. Basically, MS passes on some of their profits to Mistral.
Continental Europe had worse copyright laws since the 19th century. The US founding fathers were enlightenment age idealists, hence the copyright clause. European copyright laws were created by authoritarian empires. It's a major reason why we can't do tech. And I suspect also why Europe can't answer to the dominance of US culture.
Legal theft like the Mickey-Mouse-Protection-Law is controversial in the US. In the EU, it goes by without comment. That ends up giving casual observers an exactly reverse impression of the legal and social situation. Same for a lot of issues.
Very minor. They are simply not illegal at present. This does not put a check on lawmakers wanting to outlaw or "regulate" them.
a) The EU extended copyright before the US. It went even further than the US by reviving previously expired copyrights.
b) The relevant copyrights are expired in most of Europe. They still exist in the NL because of a special exemption granted by lawmakers.