The tl;dr of an article should be about the article.

come on now, you're really expecting too much of the internet with that kind of thought process.

I'm sure that's intentional, so the article wouldn't be stupid. You can often figure out the meaning if you don't know the language at all, but who cares?

Other than language learners. If you want to learn someone's language, read their comic books. They have pictures.

Most people can. But you can be sued in Canada just like anywhere else; it isn't legal. According to a search, the damages per offense may be capped at $5K CAD, though, which is great compared to the US.

I agree, and also

> A court has already called the training fair use

isn't dispositive. Another court, a less stupid or corrupt one, could decide differently. SCOTUS could decide differently.

But using illegally obtained material as the foundation of your business and destroying it for fear of litigation, both of those things are clearly criminal.

This is organized crime, because the organization knew (and depended on the fact) that he was doing this, and it is also the intentional destruction of evidence.

The fact that he was seeding a torrent is the thing that least matters here. They weren't making billions from seeding a torrent, they were spending bandwidth to do it. The fact that they downloaded a bunch of copyrighted works illegally in order to create their business is.

Copyright violation is civil, but conspiracy is criminal, and destruction of evidence is criminal. These AI companies are criminal. Everything associated with these enterprises should be seized and either run by the state, or run on behalf of the civilly injured parties.

edit: keep downvoting it, but I will keep posting it. This behavior is just getting by through nerve, bribery, and the fact that the US economy depends on it being successful. It is unambiguously criminal, and anybody aware of it who participated (everybody) is implicated. It is so bizarre how you people think you're better than people smuggling counterfeit designer bags or selling bootleg DVDs. You're worse.

> Now what about those millions of lines of code? Wasn’t the agent swarm supposed to take care of it?

What's the joke? They're literally saying, every day, that this is true to a civilization endangering extent. They're making demands based on this, and politicians are taking up those demands.

And now they're paying bullshit $5K bug bounties for account-stealing exploits on their own platform. They should have paid more just the make the bug seem more grandiose; I don't know who let them get away with this - this is what happens when CEOs run their own PR I guess. It's basically an public announcement that they're total fakes.

The contents of the article make it clear that "touch wood" is basically synonymous with "knock on wood," making the knocking less important than the touching.

But is is important to mention that a ctrl-f on that page for "unpainted" is proof that you didn't spend much time looking.

Do you have reason to believe that the article knows something about the origin of this practice that no one else in the world knows? The claim is set in the past, not the present. And it has to be, since there is no present significance to unpainted wood in English-speaking cultures.

> The New York Times’ lawsuit, meanwhile, asks everyone to ignore a half century of legal history and progress, and toss aside the longstanding principle of fair use in their own narrow pursuit of an undeserved payday.

There's absolutely no "fair use" precedent that says that you can program a computer with copyrighted material. They're just asking for an exception essentially based on their compression being lossy, which of course the law takes the absolute opposite opinion on e.g. distributing a 1080p of my bluray disc has been determined to definitely not be fair use.

Their essential case is that they use the word "training," and people training themselves from books is fair use, so since they use the word "training" then what they're doing is fair use. It's stupid, and judges going for it are either stupid or corrupt. I'm not actually copying your book, I'm training my printing press.

I know a woman who is like that about bare feet, but she doesn't expect the world to indulge her.

If it's your configuration, it's not a problem with your OS, it's a problem with your configuration. Your problem is specifically that your OS has chosen not to support certain characters in filenames, and you want to write files containing those characters.

That's not a configuration. There is no way to configure Windows to accept files with colons in them. As well say it's a configuration issue if the software hardcodes the assumption of filesystem case-insensitivity.

Agreed that it's not a configuration issue (and I think so does the person you're replying to), but interestingly this isn't a filesystem issue (unlike the case-sensitivity stuff). NTFS itself can handle colons in filenames just fine! It's just Windows that freaks out about it.