Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more jamessinghal's commentslogin

The Thomson Reuters case [1] is the most relevant in the court's finding that the copying of copyrighted material from Westlaw by Ross Intelligence was direct copyright infringement and was not fair use.

The purpose of training in many of the AI Labs being sued mostly matches the conditions that Ross Intelligence was found to have violated, and the question of copying is almost guaranteed if they trained on it.

[1] Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH et al v. ROSS Intelligence Inc. https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/opinions/20-613...


Thanks, I hadn't seen that one.


It's a bit demoralizing how many suggestions in this thread would have significant environmental effects beyond what large scale AI training already has.


It's far far faaar more demoralizing people not realizing orders of magnitude...

Something like 2/3rds of sunshine is already being absorbed by oceans. How much solar power do humans harvest? A billionth?


I'm talking about the above proposals (albiet hypothetical) to either cover a pole of our planet in solar and other ocean based proposals--not solar in general.


It's a bit demoralizing people talk about AI training as if it were even 1/100th the environmental impact of the personal automobile or frequent airplane trips


I'd argue that some of the assumptions made in the whitepaper are so egregiously optimistic that they cross the line into grifting, but it's impossible to know the true intentions of the founders.

For one, the cost they ascribe to the space bound solar array being only $2 million for 40 MW is pretty out there.


I think it's a combination of a fundamental distrust of the model makers and a history of them training on user data with and without consent.

The main players all allow some form of zero data retention but I'm sure the more cautious CISO/CIOs flat out don't trust it.


I think that using something like Claude on Amazon Bedrock makes more sense than directly using Anthropic. Maybe I'm naive but I trust AWS more than Anthropic, OpenAI, or Google to not misuse data.


Of course, I can't wait for a non-deterministic backend for my banking that only wires money correctly 98% of the time!


Yeah

It's like "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." by Arthur Clark.

For certain fraction of humans, they'll always have this fantasy of "magical" tech.

It used to be flying machines, space ships, etc. etc.

Well, world is mechanical, one can fantasize, but nothing is magical.


Not sure if you know this, but humans built flying machines and spaceships. And rather a lot of "etc. etc." along the way.


And authentication via interpretive dance.


Wheelchair users get extra points for doing backflips?


Hey, it could be a big hit among the crowd that thinks casinos are fun.


Begetting probabilistic bookkeeping and Bayesian accounting. Soon we'll be Moneyballing our fintech flavored AIs.


Similar move to Elasticsearch, tacking on AGPL with their existing source available licenses. [1]

The products (commercialized open source) that are often chosen by and championed by developers as opposed to executives see the harm that a bait and switch has on their popularity. With their competitors being more permissive, I don't see many devs moving back unless Valkey loses significant feature parity.

[1] https://ir.elastic.co/news/news-details/2024/Elastic-Announc...


The funny thing is that the companies that stand to benefit the most from this and that move the most money (Netflix, Spotify, Fortnite) need Apple's platform, marketing, and distribution the least.


Indeed. I’d add a fourth category: the medium-to-long tail of ad-infested casino games for children. None of those apps are successful because of the App Store. People don’t generally start at the App Store and go looking for games like this. They are all installed from CPI ads in other ad-infested apps or on websites.

Apple is exactly like a mobster demanding a cut for “protection” — except they’ve designed and controlled the system so well that your business just cannot exist in the first place until your automatic extortion payment system is in place.


They don't. Nobody heard about Netflix and Spotify from randomly browsing App Store(Do people even browse app store feeds to see what to download?). Almost every users of them would likely have searched for it.


Maybe I should have said "_don't_ need Apple's platform, marketing, and distribution" rather than "need Apple's platform, marketing, and distribution the _least_", but I think we agree.


what discovery?

For "discovery" people would have to regularly check the App Store app and read the "today" page. Maybe perhaps Spotify or Netflix will appear there once a year among 15000 stories about games.

Or you mean search? If people search for Spotify/Netflix, they already know about it. And right now Apple will helpfully cover half of the screen with an ad for Gmail if you search for Spotify (and will hide all other Spotify apps like Spotify Kids and Spotify for Creators six screens down)


American embassies do this worldwide, famously spying on Angela Merkel from the Berlin Embassy (probably). [1]

[1] https://www.duncancampbell.org/content/embassy-spy-centre-ne...


And how exactly does it help Russia to know there are planes and helicopters flying in the US around an airport

What's the next conspiracy? They have anti air weapons in embassies and wait for a military helicopter transporting a high value target?

Either way it's not worth 64 lives...


> They have anti air weapons in embassies and wait for a military helicopter transporting a high value target?

I agree with you that it seems relatively unlikely that there would be a large weapons cache inside an embassy. I want you to consider the opposite scenario of what you're dismissing though.

If an American CIA officer in Russia wanted to shoot down a helicoper, do you think it would be that difficult for them to get ahold of a rocket launcher and do so?


So what is the scenario, Russia does <what> to cause the president to be evacuated, and hopes he will fly through this route on a Blackhawk, as opposed to any other option, places an agent with a rocket launcher along the route, hopes it gets through countermeasures and shoots down the helicopter.

After this unlikely series of events, what is achieved? Do American people give up because someone killed an easily replaceable politician with bad approval rating?


It should be pretty obvious to anyone who's spent more than about 45 seconds thinking about it that you can gather good information about a potential enemy by watching how they train. For military and intelligence operations you want layered security, and you don't want to make intelligence-gathering operations against you any easier than you need to. So it makes perfect sense at least up to the moment of this crash that if you're operating military training flights in an area with a lot of foreign assets that you'd disable a feature that literally broadcasts where you are with telemetry once per second.

This mindset isn't conspiracy and framing it as such makes you sound like you have no idea what you're talking about.

> They have anti air weapons in embassies?

It'd honestly be pretty surprising if they didn't, but this is also why when countries officially go to war with each other the embassies are typically evacuated and/or evicted.

> Either way it's not worth 64 lives

Not a single person here or elsewhere is claiming otherwise.


Yes but it would just be the hot loop in this case; the rest of the app can still be in idiomatic Java, and you still get the GC.


Exactly. Write it in Java, optimize what you need to, leave the rest alone.


As polyglot dev, I never understood this religious approach that it has to be 100% pure unadulterated in language XYZ for performance.

Nope, embrace the productivity of managed languages, if really needed, package that rest in a native library, done.


I'd assume the synchronization primitives in OSes are written with the memory ordering in mind at the least.


Yeah I think this is true - they can be nops on x86. But it's still going to be better to have explicit sync instructions only where needed than implicit sync everywhere.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: