> Rich companies are infringing copyright at industrial scale in order to build their LLMs, and even if caught and challenged, they don't suffer any catastrophic punishment
And the same thing is happening here? They’re hosting copyrighted materials and have also not suffered catastrophic punishment.
Their infringement is different, and would really be a trademark issue if we hadn’t just invented the idea of copyrighting a character separately from the story they are a part of in the ‘30s (they are not individually copyrightable under the original text).
There’s a substantive difference between ingesting other people’s work and hosting copies of fans knockoff models of their favorite characters.
It’s even weirder because in other mediums this wouldn’t even be a thing. Nobody gets nearly as up in arms about fans doing their own cuts of movies, or re-using characters in written fan fiction, or etc. Very odd to me how up in arms people get about this specifically for visual art.
> Just because it's all public doesn't mean you want the cashier from the supermarket following you around to your family picnic.
This has never happened to me. Out of the space of “bad things that can happen to me” I don’t have time to worry about things with such a small probability of occurring.
I think if you're a fat middle aged man, it's not likely to happen to you personally. But you must have daughters, nieces, a mother, or some sort of female presence in your life. It happens to people like them.
An estimated 2.7 million Australian adults have experienced stalking since the age of 15, according to new results from the 2021-22 Personal Safety Survey (PSS) released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).
William Milne, ABS head of crime and justice statistics, said “We found one in five women and one in 15 men have been stalked.
“Women were almost eight times more likely to be stalked by a male than by a female, while men were stalked by a male and by a female at a similar rate.”
I searched one other comment of theirs in their history and see the same thing. On mobile so I can’t easily tell if this account is the bot account or if the ones on Reddit are.
The housing shortage has nothing to do with a lack of electrical engineers or plumbers. It’s entirely self inflicted and cheaper electricians will not change that.
More directly: I doubt there will be a meaningful increase in housing in states that have banned construction of new data centers (NY, Maine) than those where data centers are allowed to be built.
Lack of skilled tradesmen is a widespread problem and a major source of project delay (on top of massively higher housing production costs).
I assume next comes the zoning-causes-all-shortages and if only we could fix zoning then we'd solve housing – a thesis for which there's zero evidence.
That "lack" of labor is the norm because construction is a boom-bust business and nobody wants to pay to retain talent and skills they aren't actively profiting off. And very few want to spend time training new people when they are currently earning 3x their normal rate working a boom cycle.
If the AI boom crashes, how many of these people will get laid off and unable to find comparable paying work for years afterward? Even if it picks up again 5 years later, many of those people have moved on to new careers. And the only way to get them back, even temporarily, is pay them way more than their current career to pay for their losses and hardships of quiting their current career path. So ultimately boils down to "pay people more" because you aren't just incentivizing people to work for you specifically during a boom cycle, you are also trying to poach workers out of other industries for a job they know is temporary.
Yes, the labor supply for skilled tradesmen is very inelastic. Which is one reason it sucks to have so much of it drawn into a probably-speculative boom.
It is not the gotcha you think it is.
reply