• 2 Posts
  • 41 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 19th, 2024

help-circle
  • 80 steps too far down the capitalism ladder

    This is the result of capitalism - corporations (aka the rich selfish assholes running them) will always attempt to do horrible things to earn more money, so long as they can get away with it, and only perhaps pay relatively small fines. The people who did this face no jailtime, face no real consequences - this is what unregulated capitalism brings. Corporations should not have rights or protect the people who run them - the people who run them need to face prison and personal consequences. (edited for spelling and missing word)


  • That leads us to John Gabrield’s Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory

    I don’t have comments on the rest of your post, but I absolutely hate how that cartoon has been used by people to justify that they are otherwise “good” people who are simply assholes on the internet.

    The rebuttal is this: This person, in real life, chose to go on the internet and be a “total fuckwad”. It’s not that adding anonymity changed something about them, they were the fuckwads to begin with, but with a much lower chance of having to be held accountable, they are free to express it.


  • random9@lemmy.worldOPtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldYay! The system is fixed!
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    In the US if you give a politician money in exchange for voting against a bill, it’s illegal (it’s called “quid-pro-quo” in lawyer terms)

    But if you just donate money to the politician, his family, or his campaign, without requesting anything - and then he “coincidentally” happens to vote against the bill which you didn’t want, it is perfectly legal.

    Basically, many politicians are regularly doing something clearly unethical and corrupt in a technically “legal” way.















  • A lot of people associated with Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) have major objections to GitHub. Here’s one summary: https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/

    But the TLDR; version is roughly:

    • Your source hosted on GitHub is being used to train AI, and you are possibly giving up rights to algorithms you may have written (IANAL, and AI training is a fuzzy topic at the moment)
    • GitHub itself is proprietary, closed-source software, while they claim to be pro-FOSS. Aside from not being in the spirit of things, closed-source means you also don’t know what happens with your code/data once up upload it.
    • Microsoft has a history of being anti-FOSS, while some people will say it’s been changing, I think many are still rightfully concerned what their future decisions regarding GitHub might be, especially if they are a near-monopoly.

    Alternative do exist, and some like codeberg.org are specifically open sourced, and pro-open source, so many people are pushing to move hosting away from GitHub and onto other options.






  • You don’t do what Google seems to have done - inject diversity artificially into prompts.

    You solve this by training the AI on actual, accurate, diverse data for the given prompt. For example, for “american woman” you definitely could find plenty of pictures of American women from all sorts of racial backgrounds, and use that to train the AI. For “german 1943 soldier” the accurate historical images are obviously far less likely to contain racially diverse people in them.

    If Google has indeed already done that, and then still had to artificially force racial diversity, then their AI training model is bad and unable to handle that a single input can match to different images, instead of the most prominent or average of its training set.