It feels like you are making a computer program out to be more than it actually is right now. At the same time this all isn’t about what that program is doing. It’s about how it was built.

Well. When I copy and paste source code into my program and compile it it also doesn’t retain the actual code. It’s still not allowed.

If I on the other hand read source code, remember and reapply it in a sort of similar way later on then that’s totally fine. But that’s not what OpenAI did there. There wasn’t a human involved that read the articles and then used that knowledge to adjust the LLM.

There question i would have is where is the line there? Does that mean that as soon as there is some automated process that uses the data it’s fine?

E.g. could I have a script that reads all NYT articles, extracts interesting information and provides them in a different format to users?

But they aren’t forming take aways from it. They literally used that material to build this system. I also cannot just go around and take arbitrary data from anywhere and use it to build my own program. There are licenses attached to it and I have to be mindful of who’s work I can use to build my system and who’s I can’t use without explicit permission.

Building this system isn’t looking at other folks material and forming take aways from it. It’s literally using that material as input for building the system.

Might be a fundamental difference in opinion. I don’t see us anywhere near anything related to artificial life.

What they’ve built there is a product, a computer program and they used other folks data to build it without getting their permission. I also cannot go and just copy and paste source code from all over the internet to build my program. There are licenses attached to it that determine what you can or can’t do with it.

I feel like just because the term “learning” is involved people no longer view it as simply building or programming a system. Which it is.

But there is no one learning from it. It serves as a building block / source material to build these LLMs. I feel like the fact that it’s called learning gives folks the impression that it’s similar to what a human would do.

This comparison doesn’t make sense to me. If the person then makes money off it: yes.

Otherwise the question would be if copyright law should be abolished entirely. E.g. if I create a new news portal with content copied form other source, would that be okay then?

You are comparing a computer program to a human. Which… is weird.

Ah it will be at done point

And still it’s basically all Google.

Super easy. Especially since this is all under their control. So they could simply write those messages elsewhere if they wanted to. I’m not saying they do, but it’s technically possible and a walk in the park.

I would generally trust such a company to do it right. But that doesn’t save you when law enforcement and such get involved.

Yes you should. Because it’s not e2e encrypted then.

No they didn’t? My company just recently introduced it.

I’m unsure of many people know that StackOverflow also had enterprise offerings. Our company has their own StackOverflow instance with very specific content to our tech stacks.

Ah. Feels similar to the relevance discussions on the German Wikipedia. Gatekeeping at its finest.

I don’t care about stuff working OOTB - half the fun is messing around with things IMO.

I generally agree. Backups for me are just something I don’t want to tinker with. It’s important to me that they work OOTB, are easy to grasp and I have a good overview.

The web interface is important to me because it gives me that overview from any device I’m currently using without needing to type anything into a terminal. The OOTB is important to me since I want to be able to easily set this all up again even without access to my Ansible setup or previous configuration.

To each their own. I’m not saying your way of doing this is wrong. It’s just not for me. This is just my reasoning / preferences. It’s also the reason something like borg wasn’t my chosen solution, even though it’s generally considered great.

Features that are important to me are things like an easy overview of all backup jobs (ideal via a web UI), snapshots going back every day for a week and after that every month. Backup to providers like Backblaze or AWS and the ability to browse these backups and individual snapshots.

I’d assume that you can build all of this with git annex in some way. But I really want something that works out of the box. E.g. install the backup software give it some things to backup and an B2 bucket and then go.

What I’m curious about is that the git-annex site explicitly days that they aren’t a backup system, but you describe it as such.

Somehow “took me a while to wrap my head around it” doesn’t make me feel comfortable. Apart from git-annex themselves saying that they aren’t a backup system and just a building block to maybe create one, a backup system should imho be dead simple sind easy to understand.

Paid for the web interface as well. I really like that it’s super simple and just does it’s job. That would be the one I’d also recommend.

Look into Veeam. The free version should be enough for this workflow.

Yeah but these examples are all bigger than Google. The fediverse irrelevant in comparison. Additionally at least Linux doesn’t have such a strong network effect, since it’s not a social network. I mean I’m going to let myself be surprised. But I kinda doubt that anything good will come from it.

The Meta business side isn’t nice folks that try to do good in general.

Comparing a web forum to a medium article with people commenting under it. It looks like that person has little grasps on why Reddit or the likes are being used.

No one is using comments on sites like Medium to discuss anything. The comments there are always low quality from people that have no clue. You find that on Reddit as well. But the threading and voting systems kind of accounts for that.

These aggregators are a site to discuss what’s written on medium. They aren’t a replacement and vice versa.

Weird person that came to this conclusion. Imagine stop using forums. What would be lost. One person writing a medium article couldn’t replace that wealth of information.

That sounds like a very naive view on part of that developer. He probably never heard of Microsoft’s „Embrace, extend, and extinguish“ approach. This is going to be similar with Facebook. They have a lot more resources than all current instances combined and can provide a much better user experience. They are going to be the main instance on the federated network slowly starting to extend it and support features others lack. Making it a unique selling point until it’s too late.

And that’s not even looking at the moral/ethical standpoint of getting involved with Meta.

My assumption was based on the idea to have a proper YouTube replacement. Not some run down video storage for a hand full of large content creators that can afford it.

• The scalability you buy via P2P also means an increased storage. So if you want to offer a similar platform that is used in a similar way then you probably would need a multiple of the current storage capacity that YouTube offers. Likely close to an exabyte of storage (assuming that YouTube has just about 300 petabytes. Which likely is a lower number by now.)
• Especially for the amount of users consuming the content you would need a good distribution factor. Popular content would need to be distribution over thousands of peers for it to kinda work out. So a lot of people could share the necessary video data, making the storage a problem.
• Big servers in a datacenter will always be more efficient because they are designed to be compared to consumer hardware. It’s like replacing a central power plant with a small power plant per home. It won’t deliver the same efficiency and is a waste of resources. Ecologically speaking.

creators already store their content locally

A lot of creators delete at least the raw footage because they don’t have enough space and it would be too expensive. One creator hosting their own content wouldn’t even begin to scale in such a scenario. They would need powerful hardware and serious network connectivity. Something the large creators probably could afford, but most couldn’t.

peertube can run on rather old tech so I’d say it’s more efficient.

Especially old tech is less efficient than current generations.

How would a distributed system be more efficient? That is very counter intuitive. In addition the question would be who pays for PeerTube. Because unlike Mastodon or Lemmy and the likes, storing large amounts of video files is actually damn expensive.

Kinda sad they didn’t settle for something like Lemmy, but at the same time happy that they realize the value of a forum and didn’t just move to Discord.

I mean everyone seeks something different out of those communities. I do wish for the second option in general as well. But at the same time get a lot of value out of large communities with a lot of participants and content.

Depend on what you want or need and that’s different for a lot of folks.

That makes sense. I think this also shows a general misunderstanding. Lemmy isn’t and can’t be a replacement for something like Reddit at the end.

This comment captures it in my opinion. I feel like the entire post here is trying to sell something that most folks don’t really care about, failing to see why people are upset about it (rightfully so or not). A lot of theory that fails short in practice.

I understand why the admins did it. It’s relatable. But it should equally easily be understandable why some users don’t like it. “It’s a federation, visit a community with 5 members instead of 20k” isn’t the most helpful advice.

Nah. I don’t think it’s an education issue. E.g. I do understand how it works, but see defederation as the nuclear option. As a user in a federated system I don’t care where the communities are hosted that I frequent. As long as it works. That’s the entire point of federation. Otherwise we could just remove federation all together and have everyone create a separate account per instance.

I get where the beehaw admins are coming from and it’s understandable. But it’s not good and chips away at what Lemmy is and could be.

This is one instance now where this happened and I’m not on either of these instances, so I’m unaffected. But if I see more of these defederations (no matter where), the Signal it sends me is that for my needs I likely still have to bet on Reddit and at max this will become an occasional visit.

We are still far away from this point. Just saying. And a normal user can’t be expected to understand it or relate to it. It’s bad UX if they have to. Arguing for them to be educated about it is nice in theory, but misses in reality of how things just are.

Isn’t that something the bigger companies would also probably love to have? Because it creates an invisible barrier to entry at a certain scale.

Yeah and most people have USB-C chargers nowadays. It will just get rid of other connector forms and going forward unify it. It’s awesome.

If you are a heavy Apple user that might be annoying for you. But in the gran scheme of things that’s the minority.