you work in technology, presumably. so you’re supposedly an engineer of sorts.

what kind of engineer says obviously wrong statements based on their feelings?

i’m willing to provide different sources and discussion if you object to that one for some reason but virtually all facets of research agree current artificial intelligence performance is nothing like what you are suggesting. what you’re claiming just isn’t true and you are spreading misinformation. it’s okay to be scared but it’s not okay to lie.

the other guy pretty clearly meant liberal in a social & political philosophy sense and not a “liberal v conservative” modern american political theater one. i won’t speak for ferrous but i would imagine that’s why you didn’t get a reply of sorts yet. it’s kind of surprising and unsettling the amount of upvotes your comments have relative to each other but then again it seems reading comprehension is a skill more and more left to a select few.

like, anyone from .ml probably means liberal in that sense but in the particular context of this comment he definitely did and i’m confused why you’re getting upvoted when your reply is nonsensical considering liberalism is not diametric to conservative ideology within most frameworks.

sorry not to be a chode but wishy washy symbols like the ambiguity of the word “liberal” in modern discourse is a large part of what has landed us here in the first place.

no, i definitely do.

copyright is the opposite of freedom of speech. any other interpretation is just bending the truth. what is copyright other than putting a monetary value on data and information as if it were a commodity that can be bought, sold, and owned?

how the fuck is that not directly antithetical to freedom of information? freedom of speech and freedom of information are the same ideas, or at least any true proponent of free speech is a proponent of freedom of information. ig except dense fucking westoids who can’t seem to grasp basic logical concepts.

no, i just think i don’t like dealing with idiots like yourself who’s perogotive is to abscond anything you read that makes you feel any cognitive dissonance.

i have nothing good to say to those who can’t engage in good-faith discussion, like yourself. you’re part of the problem with the world nowadays.

um yes? because it’s the truth? do some research before posting man. even if you were alive back then that doesn’t mean you knew wtf was up everywhere in the country with every demographic.

apologies for reddit as a source but full time wage in 1974 for mcdonald’s was, coupled with aid like the GI program, absolutely more than enough capital to buy a family home. don’t spread misinformation. remember what was stolen, or for some never even given.

i hate how brainwashed westerners are. will go on a diatribe about the importance of free speech and then rabidly defend copyright as if it isn’t directly contrary to the idea of freedom of information, all in the same breath.

inb4 that’s a description of every reply to this comment.

my only disagreement is that unfortunately they’ve succeeded in pushing the overton window so hard that the ratio is actually much more controversial than the comment implies. if only every edgelord here read and seriously considered this person’s reply.

nope. i know what i said and i meant it.

they start like this. then they become shitty, abusive incels in adulthood. then they vote for people like the cadre of neofascist in western politics rn.

the incel to fascist pipeline is real and dangerous. and i won’t act like those who fall down it are victims and not complicit monsters anymore.

this is a fair point, i don’t disagree. it’s valid to call me out on conflating ideas of common decency with absolute morality.

that said, there are certain things that if you do; definitely make you a bad person. i think to the recently viral tweet of the ivy league ethics & philosophy professor who was absolutely aghast at incoming students’ ideas of morality. it speaks to the problem in this thread.

no actually, i’m done sitting and acting like that sort of shit is acceptable, no thanks.

paradox of tolerance demands you completely and decisively shut these fucks down before they takeover your society with their shitty ass rhetoric of hate. i’d rather it begin and end here on a dinky little internet forum than 15 years down the line in another gettysburg. i won’t aid and abet in the breakdown of common norms and decency, as you so kindly suggested.

lmfao what a fucking excuse of a reason. i hope you know i hate you. not hyperbole. i hope everyone else knows i hate you too. like genuinely, and actually; blatantly being a terrible person like you are is a large part of what is wrong with the world and i despise every single one of you chucklefucks that inches us ever further away from common decency, day by day. life isnt some fucking game.

do you recognize you’re doing olympic level mental gymnastics throughout these comments in order to make the people you identify with in the internet story the good guys or are you just incredibly dense and/or like fucking with people for kicks?

seriously jesus fucking christ what about this in particular is making it such a good litmus test to root out shitty people? they’re all just immediately, unironically, unabashedly identifying themselves in the comments here, just like that lmfao.

absolute trash is absolute trash ig.

oh yeah, it’s surely a privilege to be allowed to participate in society.

the argument “driving isn’t a right, it’s a privilege” falls entirely flat on its face when there exist no alternatives for a large majority of people and their lives. hardcore boomer energy that blatantly ignores the reality on the ground.

i agree, there are people who shouldn’t drive. i wish i didn’t have to drive.

that simply isn’t feasible in the current reality, tho.

driving can once again be a privilege only after it returns to no longer being a necessity. it is the natural right of all peoples to participate in their society. i agree with the sentiment, driving is a privilege that should be earned. but we should do ground work to make that true, we can’t just ignore the real world and indignantly say whatever we feel like; real life isn’t harry potter and the symbols and words we create bare no direct power over reality. driving is not a privilege in todays america, you don’t get to be the arbiter of decision here. in a practical sense, driving is necessary. the right to transportation and movement evolves with the age, man; it doesn’t get narrower as time goes on in the way a lot of western law seems to want to imply nowadays.

“… get people off the road who shouldn’t be there in the first place…”

i get the sentiment but i think this is problematic.

who deserves the right to drive then?

i hear you, “people who are capable”. but real life isn’t so cut and dry. the way it works in america now is awful fs, you can back this up with death statistics fairly easily; however, i think this tribalistic “us vs them” attitude drivers get is emblematic of deeper problems in our culture.

everyone is all for the animal farm until they’re the other. cliche, i know, but it’s true.

h3 is an incredibly interesting part of internet fandom/history. my phones about to die but if anyone is into it, i’ve “personally been there” since the very early days of their channel and think i have a decent perspective on the entire dynamic here, i might do a little actual, extensive write up in an edit here when i get home later.

i find h3 is fun to discuss as throughout his history on the internet he’s unique in of that he has entirely abandoned his audience multiple times. on the outside he’s a hypocrite (which is definitely true don’t get me wrong), but i think “inside” it’s a more machievallian and sinister sort of thing. frankly ethan and hila not only do alt-right dogwhistling better than anyone else; they invented a whole new technique. idk what to call it. but their snake-y nature lets them subvert typical premonitions and community norms time and time again and infiltrate way further into communities any other alt-righter would get nowhere near as close into the spheres of.

oh no the art was made with *gasp* DIGITAL TOOLS THAT ARE NOT ALREADY TRADITIONAL.

I AM GOING TO FUCKING SEETH AT THE MOUTH

I AM GOING TO EXPLODE

EEEEEaaaAAAAAUUUUURGH

seriously lmao the “AI” hate, as someone working in this field, gets more and more annoying everyday.

half these people making plagiarism machine jokes probably can’t even tell you what chatGPT and similar models’ tech stacks LOOK like beyond “huuuurrrr it’s an -L. -L. -M. riiight?”

not to point the finger at you specifically ekZepp, just the general zeitgeist. yes there are ethical issues with the current tools coming out. as someone who doesn’t really believe in the premise of intellectual property, the “copyright” problem is the absolute least problematic thing about these tools.

what will you do when megacorps sift through their dragon’s hoarde of data in previously impossible sums of time that then enables them to implement actual, dystopic surveillance and policy? do we just sit there and continue throwing tantrums like big babies about “ai took mah jab” and how it’s a garbage worthless excuse for technology? do people like you not realize that regardless of how much emotion juice you put towards the “vibe” of current tools being worthless hacks, that doesn’t synthesize that into reality? these tools are here, they’re real, and people better fucking grow up and learn to live with them rather than complaining endlessly about tenuous ethics issues. seriously. wise up, learn about the cutting edge and where it is today; and then learn how we can use modern innovations to stay ahead in the eternal game of proletarian cat-n-mouse.

being a stupid, stubborn, bull-headed reactionary about things gets us nowhere and i’m fucking tired of seeing this attitude ALL across the web. you people should grow up. do something instead of puking hate online to make yourself feel better.

sorry rant over thx for coming to my tedtalk

i made my comment pretty early before getting up to go vote in our election. i’ll admit i was premature on having an opinion as i just skimmed the content here and didn’t look into things much.

this project is definitely interesting. i suppose my sentiment initially was less that i don’t trust the cryptography, and more a general weariness of new open source projects. after reading more about the implementation there isn’t anything that jumps out at me as particularly egregious.

i support FOSS and the related philosophies a whole lot, i believe it to be one of the only ways to take our lives and communities back these days.

however, with that said, i have to disagree with this sentiment:

Nobody will be justifying their existence in front of a random internet user.

random internet users are the open source movement. new projects must justify their existence and trustworthy nature to the community. not that these people haven’t, obviously they haven’t had the chance yet.

an open mind, absolutely. but history has shown bad actors are abound, as well. i’m not sure what the proper solution here is, and i don’t think anyone else is absolutely 100% certain either. removing trust from the equation isn’t easy.

idk i’m kind of just babbling at this point tho. thanks for the civil discussion

that still isn’t an explanation of how the server supposedly “does not have the means to decrypt them [the messages]”, which isn’t me saying it’s impossible. i’m well aware of possible cryptographic solutions here. but, it isn’t wrong to be sus of this application until the organization/developers have demonstrated a degree of trustworthiness. i honestly don’t see why you would use this over just encrypting and transfering the data yourself using more traditional methods that involve the minimum number of parties. i might just be ignorant of this project, but i’m weary of it until i have a chance for further investigation

that’s fair, my absolute statement doesn’t reflect the exclusive way anti fraud laws are written. you certainly might find and successfully exploit legal ways to lie for financial gain, but at best it’s unethical and at worst you’ll have to defend why your deceit isn’t criminal fraud in a lawsuit. it kind of depends on who you piss off the most, imo.

uh, yes? it’s at the least fraud fs? the article says the doj is charging mike smith with three money laundering charges and one count of wire fraud. obviously the wire fraud charge comes from an argument that smith defrauded the distribution companies into illegitimately paying out royalties for false streams. note that the artificial intelligence solution only comes into the argument for the purposes of how he committed the crime, it really had nothing to do with the crime itself, at least intrinsically. if you read the press release from the doj, you can see that they make a pretty airtight argument that, quote:

SMITH made numerous misrepresentations to the Streaming Platforms in furtherance of the fraud scheme. For example, SMITH repeatedly lied to the Streaming Platforms when he used false names and other information to create the Bot Accounts and when he agreed to abide by terms and conditions that prohibited streaming manipulation. SMITH also deceived the Streaming Platforms by making it appear as if legitimate users were in control of the Bot Accounts and streaming music when, in fact, the Bot Accounts were hard coded to stream SMITH’s music billions of times. SMITH also caused the Streaming Platforms to falsely report billions of streams of his music, even though SMITH knew that those streams were in fact caused by the Bot Accounts rather than real human listeners.

SMITH’s hundreds of thousands of AI-generated songs were streamed by his Bot Accounts billions of times, which allowed him to fraudulently obtain more than $10 million in royalties.

it is not illegal to lie. it is absolutely illegal to lie for the purposes of financial gain. sure, i’m not disagreeing that what he did could not somehow be construed as something of a robin hood character arc (even tho he most certainly did this for the purposes of his own personal enrichment). but he almost definitely is guilty of the wire fraud charge and i do have a strong feeling, based on the prosecutorial level of this case, the involvement of a specialized division of the fbi, and his purported co-conspirators; that the money laundering charges are ironclad as well. frankly, i’m hoping his co-conspirators actually do end up going to trial and we get to learn what the company that aided in his fraud actually was. on fucking god it’d be one thing if he ran this grift machine for a little while, paid off a lil bit of his debts and all, maybe even lived off of it. but to steal $10 million fucking dollars with it, even when he knew he was committing fraud and had to explicitly hide his criminal activity??? no shit the fbi was hot on your trail. what an absolutely, colossal dipshit michael smith must be. i respect the ingenuity but it is so blindingly obvious that 10 million dollars was egregiously too many times to press a “free money button” you just invented in a capitalist autocratic hellscape.

QUICK EDIT: i do just wanna say also i did not downvote u/shani66 and i just wanted to contribute to discussion. just noticed after i posted someone had downvoted them which is kinda goofy of whoever that is.