trickypr

Fail2ban doesn’t work well against residential bot nets. A single ip generally only makes a couple of requests before rotating.

I think it does take away from the point. I could not be bothered trying to filter the information out of whatever this llm layout is.

The anubis docs website is used as an example of how anubis works.

Also, if you are not using a big CDN (e.g. Cloudflare), you still need to pay for the traffic (even if you don't pay as much for the CPU). This is doubly true for smaller CDNs like Bunny.

I think it is still compute-heavy if not compute-hard, and stuff like WASM SIMD makes it less compute heavy (not really available in JS). And also, for memory bound problems, you probably don't want the JS GC needing to clean up afterwards when WASM gives you that control.

I think it is more likely they are just drinking their own koolaid (and their friends are too). They are paid to bring in investor dollars, which requires lofty promises.

Bold of you to assume that “current economic inventives” will remain around for 500 years, especially given the American-style neo-liberal economy is only like 70 years old.

I think their point is that paint shouldn’t have any GenAI features (or any new features other than compatibility)

I think the copyright should go to the tool creator in that case, if the tool is acting as an extension of the creator.

But if the tool is created from collective human creation, the copyright should belong to all humanity, not the person who triggered the tool.

If you trained an LLM entirely on your own input, I think you should own the output, but that is not the case for any widely-used llm.

What if it was a human who took the photo, would the copyright still be owned by the equipment owner / person who set it up?

What if this applied in a photography class? The instructor owns the equipment and helped “set up” the photo. Does the instructor own the copyright?

I think there is an easy test: if you didn’t write it, it’s not yours.

If we go back 10 years and your friend says “I have an idea for an app, here it is,” and you build it, you own the copyright because you wrote it.

You give an idea to the pile of math calculated of the stolen work of humanity, the math owns it (which it can’t, so no one owns it).

No matter how detailed of a conversation you have with a friend, I don’t think they have justification to claim copyright over code written by you.

In the same way “smoking causes cancer” was a minority opinion in the 50s and 60s.