Ask friends and family to look over your cv. There might be something off about it that you haven’t noticed.

Your degree isn’t my domain but it would help to know what jobs you are applying to. What’s your applying rate? I aim for 15 applications per day and usually get a job within a week or so. Not every sector has that many openings however.

Is this the comeback?

Fuck pancakes (fluffy), marry French toast (eu citizenship), kill waffles.

Make sure you donate to the Archive and not Change.org . It’s easy to click the link, sign the petition and then donate to the wrong organisation. Change.org is kind of scummy like that.

You shat yourself at graduation?

I was at a family gathering and my grandfather was in the middle of something. He asked for my help and turns out “Apple support” on the phone was trying to get him to pay some overdue bills with giftcards.

I joked around a bit with the guy and he started to threaten me, ha.

“It’s raining cats and dogs.”

Somehow, heavy rain is represented by a downpour of household animals.

Sorry, I was talking about HiQ labs v. Linkedin. But there is Google v. Perfect 10 and Google v. Authors Guild that show how scrapping public data is perfectly fine and include the company in question.

An image generator is trained on a billion images and is able to spit out completely new images on whatever you ask it. Calling it anything but transformative is silly, especially when such things as collage are considered transformative.

Training on publicly available material is currently legal. It is how your search engine was built and it is considered fair use mostly due to its transformative nature. Google went to court about it and won.

Creators who are justifiably furious over the way their bosses want to use AI are allowing themselves to be tricked by this argument. They’ve been duped into taking up arms against scraping and training, rather than unfair labor practices.

That’s a great article. Isn’t this kind of exactly what is going on here? Wouldn’t bolstering copyright laws make training unaffordable for everyone except a handful of companies. Then these companies, because of their monopoly, could easily make the highest level models only affordable by the owner class.

People are mad at AI because it will be used to exploit them instead of the ones who exploit them every chance they get. Even worse, the legislation they shout for will make that exploitation even easier.

Whatever it is, it isn’t theft

I think lemmy is a lot less averse to users posting their own content as long as there is a proper summary, it isn’t a youtube video and you disclaim it. I would also avoid cross posting.

Maybe you can message the mods of a few communities ahead of starting to post just to be safe.

A community is also a good option. Pretty sure you can make it so only you can post on a community so it ends up filling in the same functionality.

I think many keep their moderation accounts separate from the account they use to post and comment. Checking their comment history doesn’t mean much.

Film everything for a start. There are apps that automatically upload as you film so they can’t just grab your phone and delete it.

thanks for the warning, I’ll stay away form these then

You are in one right now. Lemmy leans pretty clearly to the left, the conservative subs literally got bullied into non-existence.

“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should”

Anybody can use the data as long as it’s public facing. It’s not because websites like reddit and getty stomp their feet and want us to pay that we have to.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_datasets_for_machine-learning_research

Reddit is already in every llm model. Until the courts say otherwise clearly (and I highly doubt they will), it’s fair game as it should be.

No. That is what data brokers and big AI companies are pushing for but currently it’s considered fair use.

Anything public facing can be used for ml and it’s been like that for quite a while. It might change based on all the ongoing lawsuit but I doubt it will, it would be economic suicide and China doesn’t care if it’s “theft”.

It’s better for us, the consumer in any case, since having to pay for data would kill the open source scene and give openai and the other 3 companies a defecto monopoly.

I’m sure blind people are happy to have the models that are built with this data, and since both the image and the description are public facing, anyone can use them including open source.

The tides?