Is this the Region, this the Soil, the Clime,
Said then the lost Arch-Angel, this the seat
That we must change for Heav’n, this mournful gloom
For that celestial light?
[…]
Farewel happy Fields
Where Joy for ever dwells: Hail horrours, hail
Infernal world, and thou profoundest Hell
Receive thy new Possessor
Tarantulas aren’t supposed to smell, from what I read.
Customs officials found the shipment at Cologne Bonn airport in a package that had arrived from Vietnam, tipped off by a “noticeable smell” that didn’t resemble the expected aroma of the seven kilograms of the confectionery treats, Cologne customs office spokesman Jens Ahland said.
Anyone care to guess what that smell might have been?
Lemmy has various options to sort, eg by active. That surfaces posts that create engagement. It’s stuff that polarizes.
I find interesting stuff either by sorting by new in my subscribed communities. Or by looking for something that causes a stir. The last one creates exactly those problems that are often ascribed to “The Algorithm”.
Fair. It’s certainly an issue that someone like Musk could weaponize Twitter.
Being active on Lemmy, not this one incidence in particular. This is one example showing that the spread of misinformation does not require any sinister force pulling strings.
I have an interest in internet regulation and so read various takes. The spread of mis- and disinformation is a frequent complaint about social media. Often, “The Algorithm” is blamed, rather than human nature. The role of influencers and traditional media tends to be ignored.
The original news was posted twice. Right now these posts have a score of 80 and 456 upvotes.
Being active on Lemmy has pretty much convinced me that claims about some evil algorithm being responsible for all the ills of social media are baseless.
No.
Economics is hardly a prejudice. You’re not making a lot of sense, anyway.
Surely pointing to China is a better way to make the point that liberal democracy is not the only road to riches. I simply want to encourage people to take a hard-nosed look at the tenets of liberal democracy. They are not a revealed truth. They prevailed for a reason.
YouTube and similar platforms are major content distributors. Content owners would not be able to enforce their rights without automated surveillance, whether through Content ID or another system. Meanwhile, it is generally not economical for small creators, influencers, to litigate erroneous detections. So in many cases, Content ID is the ultimate arbiter of copyright.
When the likes of Taylor Swift or Donald Trump want to collect their licensing fees, they will use an automated system. And if some hapless citizen feels harassed by fakes and wants to make them harder to find, that will what be their only choice.
No surprise there.
People seem to have forgotten that liberal democracy prevailed not through moral arguments or appeals to conscience. It prevailed because it was stronger in war and in peace. It makes more and better weapons when it has to, and enables its citizens a better life otherwise.
Look how Hungary oppresses LGBT people. That costs a lot of money and eventually only means that members of that minority pay less taxes and contribute less to the economy.
Look to the US. The poorest states in the nation are those that were committed to racial oppression. The US would be even richer without that frivolous waste of human potential. And not just the victims but everyone.
It would work like Copyright currently works.
Yes, exactly. Content ID is a major part of how copyright currently works. The content industry convinced US courts that merely reacting to take-down notices was not enough. Companies hosting user generated content need to proactively search for infringing content.
In the EU, written law goes somewhat further. In both the US and EU, this explicitly does not require a lawsuit. It is an automated process for most practical purposes.
I can’t predict how Danish courts will see this. There are currently cases ongoing at the EU level that will make things clearer in that respect.
The point is, to enforce such a copyright, there needs to be a database of likenesses and their owners.
In practice, this is only going to be relevant for very few people, mainly famous personalities, their heirs, or whoever owns their likeness. However, if you wanted to enforce this for the entire population, the database would have to be under very close watch by the government, at least similar to a commercial bank if not outright a government entity. That’s necessitated by data protection rights in Europe.
Trying to parse this…
Orban is going after LGBTQ people in Hungary. He even denies the freedom of assembly. But that’s apparently someone else’s problem.
Orban is now using face recognition to police even small infractions, in contravention of the AI Act. Apparently, this is the real horror.
Banning all face recognition in public spaces in the EU is somehow going to fix this.
Not sure if these people are stupid or if this is some kind of grift.
The answer seems obvious. This is simply a gift to famous people, who will be able to demand licensing fees without having to do any additional work. Just neo-feudalism.
The pitch makes as much sense as trying to sell ordinary copyright as a way to stop people forging documents.
…expecting sex “in return”.
Just a joke. People rarely give away drugs without expecting something in return. Even on Halloween.
People are giving out free drugs to anyone? Oh no! Kudos to this brave person for speaking out with no regard for what that might do to their own business.
You’re looking for drugs and suddenly there’s spiders everywhere. You’d think that only happens to junkies.
Actually, is it ever spiders or just always bugs? Anyway…
Aaaargh! They’re under my skin! [sound of skin being scratches bloody] Argh! AAAAARGH!