You can ignore something actively but you are a still picking up on the message of it’s ubiquitousness. I think we have all had the experience of considering buying a {redacted} or something sometime after seeing and ignoring an add for one.
S3 storage is the killer addition here for me. I have been wanting to use Immich for a while, but wanted to use all the spare s3 quota i have lying around rather than pay for storage..
At the moment is there any legislature that is seriously pressing regulation to as you say outlaw .. or ban outright AI models that do not have guard rails built in? i know there is a lot of moves about this for things used in critical infrastructure.. but i thought no one is really saying ban these things completely.
> GCSB 'failed to respect' minister's control of agency
According to the report, the decision to sign the memorandum of understanding regarding the signals intelligence system and host the capability was not put to the minister responsible for the GCSB.
Nor was it put to any other minister.
"This inquiry found no record of any ministerial briefing or decision, nor any reference to any having occurred. It found no record of the minister having been informed of the matter at all," the report said.
Sorry to be uncool and try and explain away the joke, but. I'm reading three parts to this.. one is the risk to the job of researches, by the impacts of the systems that they have typically used until now, by being flooded with texts that look like research articles, but are produced by llms.. another is a critique of that system in the first place, in the interaction of both for profit publishing, and research funding based on measuring of publishing in those for-profit journals..
and then there is also a concern about theft of work, and plagiarism, by AI providers, ingesting pre-published work, and training on it, and additionally those providers maybe acting as gate-keepers or .. imposing their own normative values or being opaque and not impartial in how they operate..
Did I parse that correctly?
Yes. The main idea visible through this pile of problems is that human ingenuity (of the management) will find a way to use anything for more money (publishers) or more prestige (academic researchers).
The mathematicians who complain now had no worries about the way the generous idea of open access turned into the gold open access, where the author pays for publication.
These people have no problems with the phd students who are forced to publish or perish and even if they survive there is no future for them.
Now the problem is IMO that for the first time the interest of the publishers and academics are not aligned.
Publishers want more articles to sell back to the academics.
Academics are pushed by the system to publish more.
But all the work is done by academics who write and review the articles.
And also a huge inflation of articles devalue the publication unit.
So a CAPTCHA idea is only natural, even if the kind of a malefic idea a manager could have.
> "Temporarily Offline Internet Archive services are temporarily offline. " What did you DO
It seems that all of internet archive was down and I don't think that it was because of me (I hope), maybe just some other issues and some sort of just a chance that internet archive got offline at the exact same time that I had shared this thing here.
but when I had opened up hackernews and I read your comment, I genuinely felt myself also as what did I DO.
It is back again now for what its worth, whew what a relief but folks please remember to donate to internet archive for its posterity :-)
reply