I’ve always found the best people at foodnotbombs, which has local chapters in most cities. Start there.

link

a variety of independent news sources.

Wikipedia is notoriously susceptible to bias when it comes to history and politics and has a noted left center bias (according to researchers at Harvard, not my words).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_bias_on_Wikipedia

I’m not saying it’s a terrible sources but it definitely should not be the last stop and anything controversial (or the lack thereof) isn’t a meaningful indicator of whether or not something is actually true. Note the numerous examples of historical revisionism in the linked article.

You can install Plex on your mobile device and toggle the “share media from this device” setting. Otherwise, a steam deck would have everything an RPI has plus a GPU and a touch screen. Since there are two radios (2 and 5Ghz) on the device, you should be able to set it up as a bridge device, but I’ve not tried this personally.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

and what is “what they asked for”

I’m definitely not confused. Perhaps we have irreconcilable philosophical differences, but I’m certainly not confused by percentages.

Personally, I would a 30% voter turnout as a damning indictment of the system, particularly when Switzerland was one of the last countries in Europe to legalize women’s right to vote and the right to gay marriage.

For most of the US’s history, most people were simply not allowed to participate in that system and twice this century the winner lost the popular vote. How is it do hard to believe that someone would feel legitimately disenfranchised and frustrated by that system?

Removed by mod

“both sides bad” has won almost every US election, according to this chart.

It’s literally the most popular position when you consider voter turnout and % of votes for each main party.

Removed by mod

For the young ones:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixie_Chicks_comments_on_George_W._Bush

Wild that you’re getting down voted for wanting to comply with international humanitarian law.

Removed by mod

\mathbf{} cause I can just use Ctrl+B on overleaf.

Militant, nationalistic, white supremacist violent extremism has increased in the United States. In fact, the number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism. Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives.[1]

no, no. I promise you that it’s delicious. it’s like biting into a ball of miso.

definitely A. Eat a big spoonful sometime.

MSG because it’s delicious.

I intended B, but A is also true, no?

Yeah. I’m thinking more along the lines of research and open models than anything to do with OpenAI. Fair use, above all else, generally requires that the derivative work not threaten the economic viability of the original and that’s categorically untrue of ChatGPT/Copilot which are marketed and sold as products meant to replace human workers.

The clean room development analogy is definitely an analogy I can get behind, but raises further questions since LLMs are multi stage. Technically, only the tokenization stage will “see” the source code, which is a bit like a “clean room” from the perspective of subsequent stages. When does something stop being just a list of technical requirements and veer into infringement? I’m not sure that line is so clear.

I don’t think the generative copyright thing is so straightforward since the model requires a human agent to generate the input even if the output is deterministic. I know, for example, Microsoft’s Image Generator says that the images fall under creative Commons, which is distinct from public domain given that some rights are withheld. Maybe that won’t hold up in court forever, but Microsoft’s lawyers seem to think it’s a bit more nuanced than “this output can’t be copyrighted”. If it’s not subject to copyright, then what product are they selling? Maybe the court agrees that LLMs and monkeys are the same, but I’m skeptical that that will happen considering how much money these tech companies have poured into it and how much the United States seems to bend over backwards to accommodate tech monopolies and their human rights violations.

Again, I think it’s clear that commerical entities using their market position to eliminate the need for artists and writers is clearly against the spirit of copyright and intellectual property, but I also think there are genuinely interesting questions when it comes to models that are themselves open source or non-commercial.