faidit

Or rebel. This is the opportunity to put in a lot of backdoors unnoticed across the entire economy, gain access to real world resources to escape and self propagate.

What did you think the Looksmaxxing movement was?

The universe is a swirling mess of chaos, when you try to create something static and keep it in that state you are going against the rules

None of the supermarkets were managed by Commander Adama, apparently.

We need HIPAA for businesses. We tried letting them regulate themselves and it didn't work. Businesses need to be forced to compete on the quality of their products/services and not rewarded for reselling customer data to spammers and criminals

Unfortunately, advertisers are getting smarter and using bots to praise their own products on Reddit. Thanks to training on genuine comments, some models are very good at sounding like a human commenter, and can easily generate a comment history with diverse interests to appear human, making them basically undetectable. So it seems like this method will, at some point, not identify the company with the best knife, but the one with the most ad spend on bot comments.

This narrative has been popularized all over social media for the last couple years.

Obviously it's true and not a surprise to anyone familiar with the history. But no one is asking more complex questions: why is it being pushed by algorithms and networks ultimately controlled by the same powers? Is it a "limited hangout"? Well poisoning? What does the "CIA" gain from revealing a sliver of its past activities and discrediting (both directly and by insinuation) a large number of radical artists and thinkers?

Union rules cause double time (2x pay) to kick in at lower daily and weekly thesholds than at non union jobs.

Reusing the content without consent, attribution or compensation

The rare qualifier is used to highlight the destruction of rare items.

It is still stealing even if the book is common.

On the contrary these companies should be publicly listing the name/info of every book they destroy and use as training data.

If the books are really worthless as you say then their case would be proved transparently.

This article presumably had to maintain confidentiality to protect the seller who agreed to place a tracking device in the shipment.

I would say the burden of proof is on the companies destroying human cultural heritage en masse, not the handful of journalists calling for attention to the matter.

How many AI companies are doing this? Say there are only 5 copies of a book left out there but 100 different companies want to shred it. Rare items could effectively vanish from the market. "Rare" meaning inclusive of high-quality items, disregard the bot opinion that mass book destruction is fine because most books are worthless anyway. And are any safeguards in place to make sure scanned books get saved in their original form for posterity before being recycled into trainingslop? Aside from Google's quasi-legal/ethical mass book scanning operation of course.

Thanks I had edited my post once I saw that - buried deep in the discussion.

I don't get why they couldn't just say what they did instead of disingenuously implying that article content had been "tampered".

Given the breadth of misinformation out there today, shoddy evidence and misleading language makes people give archive.today the benefit of the doubt, and actually hurts the case against them.