Winston Churchill supposedly said "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else." I'm starting to think he was too optimistic.
Wasn't Bluesky developed in house by a paid team at Twitter, who also developed the protocol? And isn't its UX essentially a clone of Twitter's, which itself is the result of millions of dollars in R&D and proprietary labor? And isn't the existing familiarity with Twitter the only reason Bluesky's interface is "intuitive?"
A lot of the rough edges for Mastodon come from it actually being decentralized, and the extra complexity that brings. There is for all intents and purposes only one Bluesky instance, and there will likely only ever be one instance due to network effects. It's open source in the same way Reddit or HN are open source - the code is available, but there is only one implementation that matters.
I don't think you're entirely wrong - Mastodon could definitely do with better UX, but let's not pretend the playing field is level here. Bluesky's success is very much the result of corporate and proprietary development culture, advertising and startup hype, not of open source culture.
There's one Bluesky appview and so far one public relay run by Bluesky.[0] There are over 1000 independent AT protocol instances and numerous independent appviews.
[0] Technically two if you count the development site.
You don't have a choice. Any content you put online will be harvested by LLMs regardless of your intent, or any license you post to the contrary. That's already the norm and it isn't going to change any time soon.
hehehheh's comment is your best option - poison your content when possible. It's still going to be consumed but at least you can make the LLMs choke on it. Second best option is to never post content to the free internet, but even that's just a temporary measure - all accessible data (including private data) will be assimilated eventually.. But expecting a license to work in a post LLM world is just naive.
Yes, for the most part. While it's academically possible to attempt to control this through legal means, it is, in practice, unlikely to have much impact because LLM creators are effectively similar in operation to web crawlers for search engines. It's probably ineffective and wasteful use of webops/webadmin time and energy to obsess over attempting to control access or bikeshed about it because deploying well-intentioned "defenses" will likely end up creating false positives blocking ordinary users and costing time and effort to support these headaches that don't contribute any value. Perhaps it might be possible to notice the more honest LLM creators with user agent headers, but it's also entirely possible a nontrivial fraction of them spoof headers, run as batch jobs from AWS, and cache and store content for offline so they don't/wouldn't necessarily check for updates as often as search engines would to create a training corpus.
As bad as it sounds, this is definitely the best advice unless you actually have the funds and determination to bring legal action against the licensing breach I assume ?
I doubt a private citizen would have the resources to stand against these companies at the moment. The situation could get better in the future, in case some big company puts the resources to fight in court and wins. The precedent could be of great help in presenting similar cases.
I mean, if you have those kinds of funds, you probably also already have lawyers on retainer and lawsuits are already SOP. I don't know how effective that would be under the current legal climate.
It seems to me that the document was pretty demonstrably proven to be a hoax. You can find the arguments and evidence online, I'm not really in a mood to hash it out here.
But anyone will believe anything they like. If you want to believe it isn't a hoax you have to contend with the typographic and other anomalies that seem to show otherwise.
Yes, documents are online but how you can prove that those are hoax? The last analysis I know the guy made cross reference checks using modern search engines and newspaper databases and things where matching. I don't want to say that documents are real but for sure I never saw any argument that would definatly say that it was hoax.
I said I believe it's a hoax. I never claimed to be able to prove anything. I believe the evidence that purports to show that the documents aren't genuine, which you can refer to. Even a lot of people in the UFO community don't find the Majestic 12 documents credible.
You can't prove they're real, either, although you might believe they are. On balance however there seems to be more evidence against them than for them.
To force our enemies to question whether there’s a chance we could have been in touch with aliens and received some of their technology. That seriously changes the calculus when deciding whether to launch in a MAD scenario.
Disgraceful elder abuse is when Americans are forced to work near or past their retirement age because the social safety net provided by the US is a paltry farce. This was just a business transaction between two rich, violent assholes.
Agree that Tyson agreed to the fight and got a good payoff. I meant that it’s a really hollow victory for Jake Paul. As a senior myself a bit older than Iron Mike, a 27-year-old beating him up doesn’t impress me.
Also no argument from me about the plight of America’s seniors. I’m one of them, though I don’t live there anymore so I can afford retirement.
These public entities post _exclusively_ on Twitter as if it's the public square. It's not and it shouldn't be. The argument is not about how easy it is to create a Twitter account.
reply