Unfortunately, simply reading the constitution without any knowledge of how to parse legal language or any background knowledge about major Supreme Court decisions will leave the average person more confused than informed.
So I don't doubt that people read it, but there is a reason that law school isn't simply reciting the constitution.
While the average voter may be ignorant... JD Vance absolutely knows better, he doesn't get to hide behind claims of ignorance or confusion.
I know this one, from Middle School civics: The Judicial Branch!
Maybe they don't teach that in law school (???)
Yes, even then.
You don't have morals if they're conditioned on the identity of the person they're being applied to. That just makes you a different flavor of bigot.
Nobody deserves to be sexually assaulted, even the people you don't like.
Or DEI people
Translated to right-wing populist
There are thousands of different diffusion models, not all of them are trained on copyright protected work.
In addition, substantially transformative works are allowed to use content that is otherwise copy protected under the fair use doctrine.
It's hard to argue that a model, a file containing the trained weight matrices, is in any way substantially similar to any existing copyrighted work. TL;DR: There are no pictures of Mickey Mouse in a GGUF file.
Fair use has already been upheld in the courts concerning machine learning models trained using books.
For instance, under the precedent established in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust and upheld in Authors Guild v. Google, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that mass digitization of a large volume of in-copyright books in order to distill and reveal new information about the books was a fair use.
And, perhaps more pragmatically, the genie is already out of the bottle. The software and weights are already available and you can train and fine-tune your own models on consumer graphics cards. No court ruling or regulation will restrain every country on the globe and every country is rapidly researching and producing generative models.
The battle is already over, the ship has sailed.
Companies that are incompetently led will fail and companies that integrate new AI tools in a productive and useful manner will succeed.
Worrying about AI replacing coders is pointless. Anyone who writes code for a living understands the limitations that these models have. It isn't going to replace humans for quite a long time.
Language models are hitting some hard limitations and were unlikely to see improvements continue at the same pace.
Transformers, Mixture of Experts and some training efficiency breakthroughs all happened around the same time which gave the impression of an AI explosion but the current models are essentially taking advantage of everything and we're seeing pretty strong diminishing returns on larger training sets.
So language models, absent a new revolutionary breakthrough, are largely as good as they're going to get for the foreseeable future.
They're not replacing software engineers, at best they're slightly more advanced syntax checkers/LSPs. They may help with junior developer level tasks like refactoring or debugging... but they're not designing applications.
I know that it's a meme to hate on generated images people need to understand just how much that ship has sailed.
Getting upset at generative AI is about as absurd as getting upset at CGI special effects or digital images. Both of these things were the subject of derision when they started being widely used. CGI was seen as a second rate knockoff of "real" special effects and digital images were seen as the tool of amateur photographers with their Photoshop tools acting as a crutch in place of real photography talent.
No amount of arguments film purist or nostalgia for the old days of puppets and models in movies was going to stop computer graphics and digital images capture and manipulation. Today those arguments seem so quaint and ignorant that most people are not even aware that there was even a controversy.
Digital images and computer graphics have nearly completely displaced film photography and physical model-based special effects.
Much like those technologies, generative AI isn't going away and it's only going to improve and become more ubiquitous.
This isn't the hill to die on no matter how many upvotes you get.
Exactly.
All of my services are 'local' to the VPN. Nothing happens on the LAN except for DHCP and WireGuard traffic.
Remote access is as simple as pressing the WireGuard button.
Key based authentication is so hot right now
As soon as they became a publicly tradable company they are obligated, by the Dodge v Ford ruling, to only maximize shareholder value. Being not evil isn't an option.
Where it actually breaks is unknowable, but the structure is:
Judges determine the interpretation of the law. The executive branch enforces the law.
Both of those branches derive their power from the constitution.
The military protects the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The President is the Command in Chief of the military, however service members from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to a Private fresh out of boot camp are instilled with the obligation to refuse illegal orders.
If the Supreme Court rules on an issue and the President tries to use the military in contravention of that ruling, the military is supposed to follow the constitution, not the President.
But also fuck this type of partisan rage bait article. This type of writing is what divides us, even if it’s saying things you wanna hear.
Hear, hear.
This kind of 'information' is like doing drugs, it feels good but it destroys your ability to function as a normal human being. Getting addicted to outrage and 'owning the <other side>' is playing into the divisive politics that allows the powers that be to divide us. Nobody is going to want to work with you if you're calling them a MAGAT and you're not going to want to work with anyone who's attacking you.
Your enemy isn't the other middle class and poor people who've been convinced to wear a different color hat than you. If you can't see that and adjust your behavior appropriately then you still have a lot to learn and I hope we have enough time for you to catch up.
That's pretty close, the Permissive Action Link code was 00000000 for about 20 years.
This hamster is clearly in the know...
Not being five eyes isn't nothing :P
Of course, any traffic leaving the US is going to be hoovered up by the NSA for their SNDL program so make sure your VPN is using something quantum resistant. That being said, I wouldn't be too worried about law enforcement from the perspective of pirating digital media for personal use. As long as you're not selling pirated media then LE has more important things to worry about.
If you're in a country that has criminal 'contempt of corporation' laws where they actively pursue personal-use piracy, yeah you'd probably want both a VPN and a seedbox. Of course, now you have the problem of paying for it without linking it to your person. Unfortunately, a big part of the online digital surveillance push in western countries has been expanding KYC and AML laws that make it much harder to pay anonymously without linking your identity to a seedbox.
Big brother is always expanding his reach :/
Tree? What kind of nature loving hippie do we have here? We use concrete blocks like a real 'murican
If you're only interested in torrenting don't use a VPN, just get a seedbox. You can get one with minimal stats (1TB storage, 2TB/mo upload on a 50Gb connection) for like $6/mo. You use it to run all of your torrents and handle seeding (handy for getting access to private trackers) and then just download everything via SFTP/rsync/whatever. Or, you can spend a bit more and have them host the *arr suite and Plex/Jellyfin so you have your own private streaming service. Split between a few family members, this is a very affordable alternative to commercial streaming services.
If you're looking for a VPN for privacy concerns, don't use a US-based provider. You have no guarantee of privacy, just a flimsy 'guarantee' from the company. Use a provider located in a place that has strong privacy and secrecy laws, like Switzerland.