I don't really understand the viewpoint that people shouldn't be allowed to do math on data that I openly publish. I guess it's about protecting your livelihood.
Is your objection because of who is doing the training or just AI in general? Like do you have qualms with an individual scraping your site? And what about scraping for non-AI purposes?
I don't want to contribute to any AI models, regardless of who is making them. I don't have an issue with scraping for most other purposes, but there's no way to differentiate based on purpose.
I have limited experience with podman on M1, having only pivoted recently thanks to the docker license issues but my experience so far on an M1 Mac was I couldn't initialize or start the application from the gui.
Initialize timed out due to slow proxy speeds, so I had to use "podman machine start" at the command line to wait for the image download and install to complete. For whatever reason I couldn't start using the UI after a reboot because I got an EACCESS error and again command line worked which was then acknowledged as running via the UI.
This is in an environment where the end-user has no root and podman is running in rootless mode. Once I got it running, I was able to crank up x86 http and postgres containers from the command line mostly with no issues, although pod termination seems to work better from the UI. In fact starting containers at command line throws a warning that your container architecture doesn't match your host architecture but that's it and podman just carries on after that.
When you say x86-64, is there something special about 64-bit containers that makes them only work via the UI?
Sounds like building something simple that aids in tracking “coverage” of reviewing ToSs could be useful to increase that the odds of spotting something untoward?
Iirc there was (is?) a site which gives a rating to the various license agreements of popular services and the like, so maybe it’s a solved problem?
Can't say I love Obsidian being held up as the best we can do for program design. It's closed source. It could be an elaborate system of duct tape and string holding the thing together.
I mean it likely is quite good based on their velocity and quality. But if we're to learn anything I'd really like to see its source code.
It’s okey to prefer open source over proprietary applications. But obviously we can still learn lessons about interface design from proprietary systems. We don’t need the source code in order to observe those aspects of the application.
(And if we need understand how to application operates under the hood, it’s entirely possible to use tools like IDA and Ghidra.)
Then there is something I miss in the article maybe. What is the lesson there? What is indeed so special about Obsidian, a platform I'm completely unfamiliar with, that is different from any other platform with a plug-in architecture?