I really want a good service for disposable phone numbers. In many countries phone numbers are legally required to be linked to real identities. Its the worse attack on privacy. Still not happy signal requires it and refuses to federate.

U looking for portable or wanna go full desktop? Wjat about gaming? If u plan on messing with ai then a fat gpu is nessasary. Id go with amd and try get a lot a threads over single thread performance.

If elon really cared about free speach he would federate.

Fuck copyright they used gplv3 code why isnt it open source

Yep but at least the weights would be free

I see people doing it and its terrifying.

There is a difference between allowed and what people do. Piracy isnt allowed u can still pirate literally anything if u want to tho.

Good luck putting the cat back in the bag.

I dont see why why being downvoted you make some very good points.

Id actually like to see google shut down on copyright grounds. The innovation of necessity would drive foss search alternatives that just ignore said restrictions and most likly we would end up with a better product.

You have a right to be forgotten. Your ideas and the work you create does not.

Right to be forgotten is specifically for personally identifiable information. And I’m pretty sure it’s sound on copyright grounds as long as you don’t distribute. And honestly, I don’t really see a problem with it.

Replicating a personal backup to another device is covered by free use. Only distribution and derivative works are covered by copyright.

And yes, the length of copyright is way too long. It recon it should be the same as patents, 20 years. Or let it be as long as the warranty and let the big companies duke it out with each other.

It seems like a very dangerous, very slippery slope. The first people to abuse this would be the big corporations who want to hide and cover up as much as they possibly can. I think the copyright law framework is a useful lens to view this with which I outlined in my response above.

You chose to distribute said website to everyone on the internet. I chose to exercise my rights of fair use to make a local convenience copy of said website. I can then theoretically hold, said local convenience copy, for as long as I want, until your copyright expires, at which point I can publish it.

It’s a bold assumption that that data is not just sitting on someone’s hard drive somewhere.

Not really. If the archive decides to publish your work, that’s copyright infringement. If an AI company decides to scrape your content and develop an AI with your content, I would argue that that’s a derivative work, which is also protected by copyright.

I don’t think requiring is a great idea, but definitely making the standard that you can do if you want would be very cool.

Well the whole premise of their argument is flawed because they’re basing it on the fact of redistribution. If I’m not redistributing it, then the whole argument of that falls away entirely. Under fair use, I believe you’re also allowed to make copies of things for research purposes, so I’d argue that’s what an archive is.

No, they can’t Google first sale doctrine.

They can remove shit from your digital library because in page 76 of the terms and conditions that you didn’t read, they redefined the word purchase to mean temporarily rent.

I would argue that AI is a derivative work and that is protected by copyright. Archiving a copy of something and keeping it for personal use is not derivative work and not distribution and that’s not protected by copyright.

Copyright only protects distribution and derivative works. I can keep a copy of it on my local machine for as long as I want. Theoretically I can keep it until the copyright expires and then I can do whatever the fuck I want with it.