Tightarses exist everywhere.
Tightarses exist everywhere.
More like Star death.
I just read your list and it confirms mine.
Small buffer AND can’t skip ahead on a boring video because you can only get served the ads to unlock further video after time equal to the served video duration has passed.
That is not YouTube, it’s online TV and there will be an impact on the product. Preloading a video via a 3rd party client will still easily beat this scheme. Just get a headstart equal to the first ad break.
Sure if you fundamentally change what YouTube you can make it work.
You need very small buffers or complete disablement of seeking even outside of ads. Otherwise a client can reconstruct the video without viewer interruption.
People however expect to be able to skip ahead in YouTube videos, otherwise its just TV.
The UN should disband for not stopping Israel, something the US (Biden right now) would stop yet when Biden was criticized you defended him as ‘there was nothing he could do’.
Love Americans and their hypocrisy.
The US will veto any action.
It’s them you should be criticizing. It’s always them or Russia/China for the other team.
That’s a lie.
The original Sony feature did not give access to all the hardware and thus it was not possible to play ps3 games on it.
Their ban actually motivated people to crack Sony’s measures and install Linux with full access to the hardware.
Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization according to the Lebanese and Iranian governments or the UN.
The have 15 representatives in Lebanon’s parliament.
What makes the US have more free speech?
Legally all EU countries have freedom of expression enshrined in their constitutions.
Culturally I find Americans blind to any non governmental censorship. Since it’s legal its OK.I believe not allowing private companies to censor people is absurdly considered a violation of free speech.
There are obvious results as well: the US is way less politically diverse.
As long as a standard “unblessed” usb-c cable will work fully with the phone it’s non-issue.
Theoretically it’s possible that somebody randomly chose a war crime from 7 decades ago to soapbox about.
In reality its almost always a Nazi apologist. It also happens far more often than somebody making posts for things like the Rwanda genocide
Nice, Lemmy is finally not a leftist echo chamber, we can have Nazi apologia!
Yes they do.
Which is why you want an agreement to make them liable for copyright infringement (plagiarism is not a crime itself).
You would have to pay for distributing copyright infringing material whether created by AI or humans or just straight up copied.
I don’t care if AI will be used,commercially or otherwise.
I am worried about further limitations being placed upon the general public (not “creatives”/publishers/AI corps) either by reinterpretation of existing laws, amendment of existing laws or legislation of brand new rights (for copyright holders/creators, not the general public).
I don’t even care who wins, the “creatives” or tech/AI, just that we don’t get further shafted.
You need a very specific prompt to make a copy. Even to just be similar enough you have to put the proper input and try a lot of repetitions.
That’s why the right holders are going after the training which included copying by the AI corpos.
In your dream land right holders could just prompt the AI till it spit something close to their work and sue the AI corp for that. Repeat as needed ; infinite money glitch.
Obviously it doesn’t work that way.
Neither are AI vendors. We have locally hosted AI models and they don’t contain what they output. You can tell by the actual size.
Nope. The output is based on the users input in both cases.
It’s not stealing, its not even ‘piracy’ which also is not stealing.
Copyright laws need to be scaled back, to not criminalize socially accepted behavior, not expand.
Operating system have been used to commit copyright infringement much more effectively and massively by copying copyrighted material verbatim.
OS vendors are not liable, the people who make and distribute the copies are. The same applies for Word processors, image editors etc.
You are for a massive expansion on the scope of copyright limiting the freedoms of the general public not just AI corps or tech corps.
As if you would had they endorsed Harris.