Heratiki

I’ve glanced at these a few times now and there are a lot of if ands and buts in there.

I’m not understanding how an AI itself infringes on the copyright as it has to be directed in its creation at this point (GPT specifically). How is that any different than me using a program that will find a specific piece of text and copy it for use in my own document. In that case the document would be presented by me and thus I would be infringing not the software. AI (for the time being) are simply software and incapable of infringement. And suing a company who makes the AI simply because they used data to train its software is not infringement as the works are not copied verbatim from their original source unless specifically requested by the user. That would put the infringement on the user.

The creator of ChatGPT is sentient. Why couldn’t it be said that this is their expression of the learned works?

Not wearing helmets is definitely a Darwin Award. But the OneWheel itself has a tendency to just shut off and nose dive when limits are exceeded. Usually at max speed. Even though it’s programmed and designed to be self righting it can sometimes not act correctly and just fling you off. So you could be cruising along just like you always do and when you start leaning too hard it will slowly nose back up and slow you down to keep you within the limits. But let’s say that’s happening for the 80th time and you happen upon a small rock at the same time only for the software to be unable to correct and nose dive into the ground instead. To the rider nothing would be different until the unit nose dived throwing them usually at full speed.

The reasoning for the recall isn’t necessarily operator error but overlooked safety suggestions. The OneWheel is billed as a self balancing electric skateboard and while it is the “feature” causing all of the issues is you can exceed the balancing limitations of the device while using it effectively causing it to stop balancing and ditch the rider at speed. See you lean to go faster. While leaning forward to speed up the board will sense a balancing issue and usually try and right itself by trying to nose the board back level again before slowing down. What’s happening in this instance is that instead of doing this the board will just shut off and nose dive into the ground throwing the rider.

Imagine if you would using the brakes on your bicycle only for it to decide you’re going too fast and just go “welp I can’t stop you so I better give up.. good luck!”

What is the use case for such a device? Outside of being completely invasive to everyone around you.

Then what of all those who wouldn’t get unemployment when they’re laid off because a union decided to strike for more favorable conditions.

I had typed out this HUGE rant about how it would hurt Ford’s bottom line severely to give into the UAW strike demands. So I did some research to help my stance. I was wrong. Year over year, for the past 3 years, Ford Motor has shown an increase of at least 9% gross profit. Ford could very easily afford to cut into some of the more than $24 billion dollar gross profit to give into the 40% raise the UAW are requesting. I’d be willing to bet GM and others involved are in nearly the same boat.

Edit: That being said their net profit has taken a steep dive in the last few years so I’d assume there is some cooking of the books going on.

This is 100% correct. Sadly it’s not as transparent as it should be and quite a lot of corporations have ways of getting around it. Not to mention during COVID there was a lot of taking from the fund but nearly no returning.

Playing devil’s advocate but what would be the point in working if you got paid similarly by just striking? A worker’s strike is a gamble and always has been. In this instance the workers do not have the upper hand because demand for domestic made vehicles has plummeted and automation is nearly capable of replacing the workers.

Another thing I don’t understand is this isn’t unemployment. This is chosen by the worker and the union and so it’s not unemployment but refusal to work.

All hail Lemmy!