Misleading title. This isn't an "AI Company". As far as I can tell, it's some scammer that used AI Tools to create similar music and then copyright strike the original artist to steal their revenue.

The major issue here is how YouTube handles these claims. From the article:

YouTube’s dispute process places enormous trust in whoever files the claim, with little built-in protection for independent artists who lack legal resources.

This isn't something new and was already being done before AI tools were available.

There is a class action "mass arbitration" against Google for this: https://www.classaction.org/...

Additionally, the Fulu Foundation has a bounty reward out for anyone who is able to get these working with something like Home Assistant.

The pot is currently at $12,856.00 https://bounties.fulu.org/...

In the U.S., since doing so would circumvent measures put in place on these devices, publishing how to do this would go against sec. 1201 of the DMCA. This has a risk of a maximum sentence of 3-5 years in a Federal Prison. You can still privately show the Fulu Foundation how it is done, and they will be able to use this information to help their case in their attempt to reform this law.

If you live in the U.S., you can also help by letting your representatives know about this. Here's an ActionNetwork page that Fulu set up so that you can easily do so: https://actionnetwork.org/...

Given the trend of recent posts in here. I'm going to guess that the word "toxic" triggered the automod.

Looks like they're finally cleaning up a bunch of junk.

In July 2024, Google announced it would raise the minimum quality requirements for apps, which may have impacted the number of available Play Store app listings.

Instead of only banning broken apps that crashed, wouldn’t install, or run properly, the company said it would begin banning apps that demonstrated “limited functionality and content.” That included static apps without app-specific features, such as text-only apps or PDF file apps. It also included apps that provided little content, like those that only offered a single wallpaper. Additionally, Google banned apps that were designed to do nothing or have no function, which may have been tests or other abandoned developer efforts.

I'm failing to see why the creative writing machine is better than a simulation set to 'rough'.

This doesn't sound like they are using LLMs for processing their 3D models. The way it's described in the article sounds a lot more like some machine learning model trained on physics simulations for aerodynamics.

The title is missing a significant keyword here: "construction"

A more accurate headline:

Meta data center construction allegedly muddies Georgia town's drinking water, investigation underway — EPA promises immediate investigation after congresswoman brings dirty jars of water to hearing

This isn't exclusive to datacenters, any sort of large construction projects should be under the microscope right now. If there are legal loopholes allowing water supplies to be contaminated, that should be addressed. Meta and any other companies responsible for this should be billed the costs for cleaning up or for funding additional water treatment solutions to make up for this.

My question simply relates to whether I can support the software development without supporting lemmy.ml.

No. You can't support Lemmy without supporting lemmy.ml because the developers use lemmy.ml for testing. They have not created a means for users to separate out their donations from one or the other.

That's why others are suggesting you should just support a different but similar fediverse project like PieFed or Mbin instead.

In the U.S. they may even offer things like State Park passes.

Unless their company has enterprise m365 accounts and copilot is part of the plan.

Or if they're running a local model.

This news article is missing the statement from the school's principle:

In a statement shared with parents, Principal Katie Smith said the school’s security department had reviewed and canceled a gun detection alert, while Smith (who didn’t immediately realize the alert had been canceled) reported the situation to the school resource officer, who called the local police. https://techcrunch.com/...

Looks like this system just flags footage for review and humans make the ultimate decision.

I'm not sure how the notification on this flag/event is worded. It's possible that it should be worded differently to express a need to actually look at the footage.

In this case the principle probably jumped into panic mode, or didn't understand the system well enough.

That's not AI, that's just a bad Photoshop/InDesign job where they layered the text underneath the image of the coupon with Protein bottles. The image has a white background, if it had a clear background there would have been no issue.

Edit: Looking a little closer, it looks more like some barely off-white arrow was at the top of the coupon image.

Edit2: if you're talking about the text that looks like a prompt, it could be a prompt, or it could be a description of what they wanted someone to put on the poster. The image itself doesn't look like AI considering those products actually exist and AI usually doesn't do so well on small text when you zoom in on a picture.

Its probably better this way.

Otherwise you end up with people accusing movies of using AI when they didn't.

And then there's the question of how you decide where to draw the line for what's considered AI as well as how much of it was used to help with the end result.

Did you use AI for storyboarding, but no diffusion tools were used in the end product?

Did one of the writers use ChatGPT for brainstorming some ideas but nothing was copy/pasted from directly?

Did they use a speech to text model to help create the subtitles in different languages, but then double checked all the work with translators?

Etc.

• These fridges didn't have ads when people first bought them.
• If you're renting, usually the landlord picks the appliances.

Highlighting the main issue here (from the article):

“This means that it is possible for the WhatsApp server to add new members to a group,” Martin R. Albrecht, a researcher at King's College in London, wrote in an email. “A correct client—like the official clients—will display this change but will not prevent it. Thus, any group chat that does not verify who has been added to the chat can potentially have their messages read.”

I think you missed the part at the very end of the page that showed the timeline of them reporting the vulnerability back in April, being rewarded for finding the vulnerability, the vulnerability being patched in May, and being allowed to publicize the vulnerability as of today.

I had to click to figure out just what an "AI Browser" is.

It's basically Copilot/Recall but only for your browser. If the models are run locally, the information is protected, and none of that information is transmitted, then I don't see a problem with this (although they would have to prove it with being open source). But, as it is, this just looks like a browser with major privacy/security flaws.

At launch, Dia’s core feature is its AI assistant, which you can invoke at any time. It’s not just a chatbot floating on top of your browser, but rather a context-aware assistant that sees your tabs, your open sessions, and your digital patterns. You can use it to summarize web pages, compare info across tabs, draft emails based on your writing style, or even reference past searches.

Reading into it a bit more:

Agrawal is also careful to note that all your data is stored and encrypted on your computer. “Whenever stuff is sent up to our service for processing,” he says, “it stays up there for milliseconds and then it’s wiped.” Arc has had a few security issues over time, and Agrawal says repeatedly that privacy and security have been core to Dia’s development from the very beginning. Over time, he hopes almost everything in Dia can happen locally.

Yeah, the part about sending my data of everything appearing on my browser window (passwords, banking, etc.) to some other computer for processing makes the other assurances worthless. At least they have plans to get everything running locally, but this is a hard pass for me.

Didn't we already have one last year?

I mean there might be a way, but it's not easy.

The laziest and worst method is to use ChatGPT and have it "pretend to be some character" with a system prompt.

If you want something really good, you would need to train the model from scratch based only on knowledge that one particular character would learn from their world up until that point. However this is going to be a ton of work just for one character.

For a middle ground you could probably cheat a little and start with a model that's close to the knowledge base you would want most characters to have. Then you would use something like a LoRA, or RAG on top of it for each individual character.

For instance, if you wanted to make a game in a Victorian Era setting, you could start with this model that's only trained on text from the 1800's: https://github.com/haykgrigo3/TimeCapsuleLLM

To make it better you would have multiple base models that are trained on various backgrounds that NPCs could have (Farmers vs Merchants vs Soldiers vs Nobility, etc).

Even then, this would not work well for certain games. For example, if you're trying to tell a specific story, you don't want a character that will go off script or give away some information that spoils an intended plot twist.

Why not create comparison like "generating 1000 words of your fanfiction consumes as much energy as you do all day" or something more easily to compare.

Considering that you can generate 1000 words in a single prompt to ChatGPT, the energy to do that would be about 0.3Wh.

That's about as much energy as a typical desktop would use in about 8 seconds while browsing the fediverse (assuming a desktop consuming energy at a rate of ~150W).

Or, on the other end of the spectrum, if you're browsing the fediverse on Voyager with a smartphone consuming energy at a rate of 2W, then that would be about 9 minutes of browsing the fediverse (4.5 minutes if using a regular browser app in my case since it bumped up the energy usage to ~4W).

That, or use a chromium fork that ignores manifest v3 and supports manifest v2.