voxic11

Not paying anyone would be a violation of minimum wage laws. Or it would mean they are truly equal partners in the project who have no "employer" they are working under. In which case it does seem most fair that they would all own the copyrights to their contributions absent some other agreement to assign copyright.

Attractive nuisance laws only apply to things likely to attract children, not grown adults.

Distillation a pretty well documented technique that actually pre-dates LLMs https://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.02531

Here is a project that guides you through it if you want to prove to yourself that it works https://github.com/arcee-ai/DistillKit

And this is why he isn't being charged with destruction of evidence. He is being charged with destruction of property subject to a civil seizure.

The only reason they can charge him with this is that he destroyed it after being notified that it was being seized. If he has deleted it before then there would be nothing they could charge him with.

In cinema it works the same as in software engineering. There is an exception to normal copyright law where works made in the course of employment are treated as if the author is the employer rather than the actual author of the work. Its known in copyright law as a "work for hire" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_for_hire

> In the United States, United Kingdom, and several other jurisdictions, if a work is created by an employee as part of their job duties, the employer is considered the legal author or first owner of copyright.

> It is an exception to the general rule that the person who actually creates a work is the legally-recognized author of that work.

People who want to play video games, or watch videos using hardware decoding, or train machine learning models? DRM here means https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Rendering_Manager

> DRM exposes an API that user-space programs can use to send commands and data to the GPU and perform operations such as configuring the mode setting of the display.

> User-space programs can use the DRM API to command the GPU to do hardware-accelerated 3D rendering and video decoding, as well as GPGPU computing.

So you think that is the unauthorized use that the officers were fired for?

Do we know if it was the worker who presented it as such? Everyone has to learn and if they are learning on the job its up to their employer to ensure that the work product is reviewed or overseen by someone with adequate experience.

You still need the GPUs for training new models though right? This is only suitable for inference.

> The New Jersey plates that were allegedly stolen from the LA dealer were 34 03 DTM, not 34 10 DTM. But when the police report was created and the plate was entered into Flock’s system, it was just recorded as 34 DTM. Just the five large characters, no little number in the middle. And Flock’s AI tech wasn’t registering that non-standard little number when it began picking up the Range Rover around town. It just saw 34 DTM in large type and started alerting the local police.

No, it wasn't looking for partial matches, it was looking for an exact match of "34 DTM" and it missed the "10" in the middle of the victims plate because it was in non-standard small lettering (as required by law for those types of plates in their state). To be clear, the 10 was in the middle of the victims plate number, which was "34 10 DTM", not the end of it.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/how-flock-cameras-wrongly-trac...

> The New Jersey plates that were allegedly stolen from the LA dealer were 34 03 DTM, not 34 10 DTM. But when the police report was created and the plate was entered into Flock’s system, it was just recorded as 34 DTM. Just the five large characters, no little number in the middle. And Flock’s AI tech wasn’t registering that non-standard little number when it began picking up the Range Rover around town. It just saw 34 DTM in large type and started alerting the local police.

No, it wasn't looking for partial matches, it was looking for an exact match of "34 DTM" and it missed the "10" in the middle of the victims plate because it was in non-standard small lettering (as required by law for those types of plates in their state).

The standard catalog price for a dedicated falcon 9 launch is $74 million. So this is actually up-charging the government a bit (I assume there is some custom work or extra cost for arranging for the appropriate security/secrecy).

Why would they need to do it in their own waters?

I agree pay to win games suck, its the one feature which will make me instantly drop a game. But pay to win isn't gambling, afaik you can't earn robux by wagering robux you can only earn worthless in-game rewards.

But that is all speculation/opinion/non-first hand knowledge, you can't actually say any of those things in court without an expert witness. Only expert witnesses can testify to things that they didn't witness themselves, lawyers and lay witnesses cannot.

Also don't think you can simply get the opposing expert witness to give this kind of testimony on cross examination. During cross examination you can only ask them about things they testified to during direct (and a few other things such as their qualifications). So if they never testified anything about your IP during direct then you can't ask them about whether or not your IP matched during cross.

If you don't have the money to pay for an expert witness then you better just hope that the jury already knows about IP addresses and actually realizes that IP addresses matching was never brought up during the trial (they won't btw, the general public knows nothing about these things).

Think about it this way, all this techno mumbo-jumbo about account IDs and IP addresses may as well be black magic as far as the jury and court is concerned. So only a verified expert witness can testify about them. If we allowed otherwise then every trial would be nothing but testimony about how various magical or religious principles mean that you can't possibly be guilty (or vice versa).

Do Not Track cannot satisfy the GDPR, it requires that you obtain informed and specific consent so even if a user had the DNT bit set to consenting you would still need to show the banner.

That is how discord has chosen to implement it but nothing about the scheme actually requires an app besides a mobile browser and QR code scanner to be involved.

I use a passkey with discord on my phone. If I want to log in to discord on a computer it shows a QR code on the page/desktop app and I scan it with my phone to log in. I could see this become a pretty common pattern.

I like it because I can use discord on even a pretty untrusted computer without providing it any credentials or access to my passkey, and then later when I'm done I can revoke the session.

I put my passkeys in my password manager and it works fine.

Not from the US but https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/freedom-of-inform...

This news segment goes into more detail about how he downloaded the documents (by incrementing the document id in the url) https://x.com/Brett_CBC/status/984751373525901313

Most crimes require intent, hacking is one of them. The relevant law in this situation is:

> (a) Whoever— (2) intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains— (C) information from any protected computer; shall be punished as provided in subsection (c) of this section.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030

So if it can't be proven that you intended to access a computer without authorization, or exceed your authorized access, then you can't be found guilty of the crime.

Consider the possible consequences of the law not requiring intent, if simply accidentally exceeding your authorized access could be a criminal act.

Stanley v. Georgia considered the question from the right to privacy side, not the first amendment. The relevant cases are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalit... and United States v. Williams https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003#Supreme_Co...

For drawings it has to additionally be "obscene" (since obscenity isn't protected by the first amendment). And there is also a specific law that criminalizes even non-obscene realistic computer generated imagery.

Yes but it was so shocking because it was such an inhuman, "unaesthetic" play. It was considered to be "creative" in that no human would have thought of making the move, so it can't simply be copying human play.

There is a popular mcp interface but having them write blender scripts is also pretty usable.

Lots of people take diphenhydramine products as sleeping pills and they are advertised as such OTC in the US. Long term Diphenhydramine use is associated with many negative health outcomes and despite the warning labels many people become dependent on them.

Treated waste water is very commonly used as well. Just not normally for vegetables intended to be consumed fresh. Its mostly used to grow animal feed and non-food agricultural products.

> In 2027, the law will impose extra obligations on the most popular services.

I presume this is the extra obligation starting in 2027 that wikipedia mentions.

Negative leap seconds mean we skip a second, normal leap seconds are the ones where we repeate a second.

Explain why negative leap seconds are worse? Intuitively it seems like normal leap seconds would cause way more issues, or at least not more.