A realistic take on the situation.
I fully agree, despite how much people hate AI, training itself isn’t infringement based on how copyright laws are written.
I think we need to treat it as the copier situation, the person who is distributing the copyright infringing material is at fault, not the tool used to create it.
I mean, Facebook already requires ID in many cases. https://www.facebook.com/help/159096464162185/
You’re required to prove your age in a bunch of real life scenarios too, like buying alcohol, tobacco, or a firearm.
It is a privacy issue, but the question is on the balance is the privacy concern worse than the harms being done by youth on social media?
Given that there are literally hundreds of university studies showing how bad this shit is for kids, and leaked internal documents from the social media companies themselves, I think it’s the better choice at the moment.
The same way Australia is doing it, a big fine for companies that don’t comply and add an age verification process to sites.
Will it work 100%? No
Will it work enough? Probably
It’s only not happening because companies aren’t going to do it on their own, the government needs to force it to happen, and the people need to force the government.
I automate business processes across multiple industries (not using AI currently)
My retirement fund looks crap, I’m worried about all of this too but it’s still a terrible idea to try to retain a job when it’s no longer necessary. Just tax the company a little bit less than they saved, and pay people to go enjoy their lives.
You won’t even notice when it’s done right. We’re still in early days at the moment where you can actually tell.
You have fun checking the fine print on every future game just to make sure they haven’t used it.
While we’re at it, we should also go after all the car companies for putting so many horse stables out of business. IBM for putting computers (this was a job title for humans before it was done by machine) out of jobs.
and a million other situations where technology has replaced a particular type of worker
There’s zero chance this catches on, nobody wants to get rid of a camera bump badly enough to carry around a second device.
Fair, but in this case, it’s Raph Koster. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raph_Koster
He was Creative Director for the original SWG, and then Chief Creative Officer under Sony once they bought it.
He also was a lead designer for Ultima Online before that, and did work on multiple other games (Including EQ2) afterwards.
You didn’t review your order before submitting, the fact that the customizations were missing was clearly visible before you agreed to purchase.
From a Customer Service perspective, they probably should have refunded(or remade) from the start, but you are not in the right here. You threatening legal action just makes you an ass.
That’s not a scam, that’s just a stupid computer system.
Scams are intentional.
Nothing stopping you from setting out on your own.
There is limited worlds, but they aren’t static, the number of worlds (and which worlds) will change. The surface of the planets can (and will) also change. There’s someone in alpha right now cutting down a mountain (literally). There’s also a system for planets dying, and being restored.
Anything over about 90 feels great to me, and I can’t even notice the difference between 144 and 240.
The first argument is a non-starter, professions have come and gone for all of human history. Where did all the people who raised and trained horses go when cars came out? Where did all the people go who made buggies and coaches? What about people who lost their jobs to construction equipment like excavators? What about switchboard operators at telephone companies?
The economy will re-organize itself to adapt to the newly available labour. Don’t get me wrong, individuals are going to be absolutely devastated by this, but not replacing someone who’s doing a job that can be automated is no different than having them dig a ditch and fill it back in. It’s never a good idea to hold back technology just to keep jobs around. This path leads to the Amish.
Liability for accidents has already been sorted out for 100% autonomous cars, it’s the vehicle manufacturer’s fault. For most of the current ones on the road, they are modified existing vehicles, so the manufacturer would be said to be the self-driving company (like Waymo) though once the software is built in from the factory it will be on Ford or Nissan or whatever likely in partnership with a software vendor. They may insure themselves, but likely only against catastrophic situations rather than day-to-day accidents.
They are definitely considering cyberattacks.
The benefit to self-driving cars is self-evident though. There’s no argument that they wouldn’t be better than human drivers in theory. Not only for safety, but for traffic, parking, cost, etc.
The only thing holding them back a this point is refinement. They have already proven that in at least three cities, they are mile for mile safer than human driven vehicles.
Waymo has gone from 1 city, to 3, to now pushing out to 11 in a few years. I wouldn’t be surprised if it doubled 5 times again in the next 10 years. That would put it in just under 200 cities by 2035.
The first iPhone only sold a million units in the first year, but two years later there were 25 million iPhones and they hit the 200 million mark by year 5.
Your example about Netflix proved my point. Naysayers said it wouldn’t work, but they are now the leader.
I’m happy to wait and see, I fully expect them to arrive in my city in the next decade.
You’ve cast double on my links, but you’re clearly too young to actually remember these things happening. I’m not. I do remember lots of people laughing and dismissing all three as never going to be for normal consumers (I’m not old enough to remember them laughing at cars)
You’re also clearly not paying attention to this industry if you think Tesla is a leader. You’ve only caught what made the news in the UK.
Waymo is far and away the leader, having hundreds of cars driving around daily with nobody behind the steering wheel.
Mobileye(NA and Europe) and Baidu(China) are also actively driving around without drivers in certain places.
The only place Tesla has them fully autonomous is in the factory as far as I know.
Then the gang is going to have to take out both the self-driving car company AND the cellphone company at the same time. It’s not just one getting the data, and again it’s going to get noticed immediately if cars start going missing and data is being blocked. They may get ahold of a few dozen cars if they try to do it quickly, but they won’t get even hundreds.
The battery may worth something, but it’s a lot of effort to steal a car just to get a $15k battery. Criminal gangs aren’t stealing 5 year old Kia Niros for resale across the globe, they generally target vehicles worth 3-10x that much.
There’s no “source code” for self driving cars in the sense that a video game has source code. The cars have some normal code yes, but the self-driving portion is a trained machine learning model that is essentially a black box. It takes millions of compute hours on high end graphics cards along with millions of hours of driving data to generate a new version of that model. Stealing the existing driving model still won’t make it work in West Africa or the Middle East. Stealing the training data wouldn’t help get it driving there either, they’d have to collect millions of hours of local training data for each destination.
It would be easier for these gangs to start their own self-driving company.
I could fairly easily ask a human artist to draw me something that would infringe on a copyright for a character they had never even seen before. It would technically be against the law, but given that no other parties know about it, it’s unlikely to ever get caught. The legal problems arise if I use that art in a visible fashion such that the copyright holder would find out, and then it would be me getting sued, not the artist.