Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    42995
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Isn't the thinking something along these lines. Cubans in Miami hate all things SoCIaAlism because Castro. Far from all of them were landed gentry that were actually screwed over by Castro, but they all see themselves that way. And, I think a lot of Cubans view themselves as European white Spaniards, regardless of their actual ancestry. Texas Hispanics tend to see themselves as having "done it the right way" (whether they really did or not) and subsequent immigrants are making them look bad. There's probably also a good bit of contempt for the Central Americans by the Mexicans. Common to both of them is that machismo and the more conservative aspects of Catholicism.
  2. I am perhaps more familiar with the way textual output is generated, but I'm not sure it matters very much. There are two theories or ways that copyright is infringed by AI, both implicating the reproduction right. First, training a model almost inevitably requires making a copy of a work to feed it to the network. And, in many cases, the AI companies admit using pirated copies of works for training purposes. The second is the output of the network, which may be substantially similar to the original work on which it was trained, thus infringing the reproduction right. That is, it looks like say, Mickey Mouse, instead of some temu version. I'm guessing Disney's license gave them the right to train on Disney content and also to return substantially similar results to Disney works. So you can prompt it to do "Mickey cornholing Minnie" and get it. You can make a sort of metaphysical argument that somewhere between input and output, at least partial images or text fragments that may be infringing (substantially similar to a training input) are used as the pattern that is recognized, but that's getting pretty abstract and is probably likely to be found "transformative fair use." So, license or otherwise remove those infringing aspects of AI, and there's no copyright infringement. If there's some other theory, I'm interested to hear it.
  3. I know multiple MDs that pursued engineering degrees at UT. Two orthopedic surgeons, one a urologist. Both think it's excellent preparation for a doctor as the practice of evidence-based and other aspects of medicine line up pretty well with engineering analysis and thought. Chem E tends to line up best with the premed requirements, but probably the newer biomedical degrees also. Guess it depends on the school. It is, however, a pretty brutal way to do premed. Also, it's my opinion that a kid that's not actually interested in some type of engineering probably isn't going to like it or do well, no matter how good their math/science aptitude. By that I mean has some demonstrated curiosity as to how things work, how they're made, etc.
  4. Need to have engineering gin up a coal-burning module for something or other. No scrubbers.
  5. I mean, taxation of options on vesting is a screw-up of some sort, given that it results (if it did) in recognition of income. The point that paper billionaires can monetize without liquidating and recognizing gains still stands.
  6. Was even going to reference you on that, not sure why I didn't.
  7. Didn't they modify the double contact rule again? It's legal on first contact and (something else?).
  8. Yes they can change fast, but I think some things are going to prove anomalous. It's not a perfect analogy, but TTU-in-the-WCWS-final-because-of-one-player, TCU-in-the-CFP-final anomalous. And, no one seems to want to admit it, but there's a decent amount of plain luck involved: coaching hires, recruiting, portal takes, etc.
  9. Smell the glove!
  10. It probably makes good sense not to involve the legislature in pardons and criminal justice generally, other than the making of criminal laws. It's a power that just screams "this should be exercised by the executive." But when you have a corrupt executive and a corrupt/compromised congress that poses no impeachment threat, well, it all kind of goes to shit. Every scheme, at one level or another, is going to have to presume a degree of good faith.
  11. Gonna go ahead and leave out Oklahoma? Their own meat on the hoof scandal, basically Bud Wilkinson's entire tenure. Gordon Cross and the University the football team can be proud of? Switzer repeat scandals. Various and sundry acts of horrendous violence by players on innocents.
  12. Disney could be gambling that they'll be enjoined from infringing IP or will voluntarily stop. And, they may be gaining an advantage in that by licensing, OpenAI can return pure Mickey Mouse or Moana results or whatever, whereas most copyright infringement by AI is based on either a) less than identical similarity to copyright content or b) minimal no similarity, just the infringing act of training on and making unlawful reproductions of copyright content in the process.
  13. I dunno, man. I won't argue about BBQ, of course, but even the best CFS is inherently a bit dry. And the flavors tend not to be as subtle as a fine smoked brisket or other cut.
  14. Interesting that many if not most of the breaches occurred with SCADA controllers. Those way predate the internet, but I guess at some point remote control became a thing, without the robustness of more modern remote control via internet.
  15. WAG? I suppose their strategy is to be a "first adopter," that is to let AI freely use their content/characters to generate license revenue and/or promote the characters. It wouldn't surprise me if the investment is tied to some sort of SEO to return Disney characters more often than any other licensed property, and certainly over unlicensed and presumably infringing characters/IP. I'm not a big fan of AI and would probably prefer it if IP owners boycotted entirely and just kept suing. But that's probably not commercially realistic.
  16. Well, they're also licensing their IP to OpenAI for an undisclosed sum. This is, presumably, what all IP owners want from AI.
  17. I'm not trying to pick a fight, really. The notion that government charity (but why not private as well?) incents poverty and dependency is conservative orthodoxy. Much like trickle down. Maybe it does, but there are plenty of indicators that maybe it doesn't. And as a recovering conservative, I am skeptical of that orthodoxy.
  18. She means the darkies.
  19. Interesting point. Trademark registrations have to be renewed every 10 years and part of the renewal is alleging and proving that the Trademark is still in use. Use in the Trademark sense means, for goods (if goods are what is recited in the registration) selling product bearing the mark in interstate commerce. For services, it means advertising the services in interstate commerce while being ready willing and able to deliver the services. The basic registration for the Oilers is this one. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=73104154&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch The mark is "Houston Oilers," words only, no logos, for the following services: EDUCATIONAL AND ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES IN THE FORM OF PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL GAMES AND EXHIBITIONS That's pretty standard for a football team registration. Or any sports teams, sub out "football." So, the last time the registration was renewed, this was submitted as a specimen, that is proof that "Houston Oilers" is in use. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn73104154&docId=SPE20180105155702&linkId=2#docIndex=1&page=1 It's a page from the 2017 Tennessee Titans Media Guide showing the logo history of the Oilers. That ain't advertising football games and no one is ready willing and able to provide an Oilers football game. That's pretty much not trademark use, even for the loosey-goosey standard for service marks. So, if someone were so inclined, I think they could cancel this base registration pretty easily because it's not used on the services and therefore abandoned. What you also notice, though, is that the attorney is not for the Titans, it's for "NFL Properties." That tells you that the league really controls the trademarks and team names and they're not about to let the Texans or anyone else revive the Oilers name, whether the registration could be cancelled or not. Note also that there are registrations for "collateral goods," like team apparel. The Titans/NFL still sell Oilers gear, so the mark is actually in use there and not abandoned.
  20. What's surprising to me is that they even got the green light to prosecute this. It is in Cali, though.
  21. But not enough to elect McCain and McCain laid that pretty directly at her feet. Those that adored her were probably the precursors to Trump's base (she's an idiot, just like us!).
  22. This is completely true. We're not budging "the base." They've been the same since 2016, but they can't win an election by themselves. But if these fault lines can develop and open up among the true believers, that does not bode well for them in the future.
  23. My inbox is polluted with MAGA shit presumably because my voter registration card used to say R. Or my voting history prior to 2016. That's kind of scary.
  24. To the extent clarification is required, you seem to be arguing that overextension of charity (implicitly through government programs) has increased dependency because it has reduced stigma. I.e. "social programs incentivize laziness and poverty." I argue that the number of dependent people is about the same as it ever was, but they are more noticeable because they're now concentrated in urban ghettos rather than being dispersed over a rural-agrarian area. The poverty percentage in the US has been pretty stable for a good long time now, indicating that there really isn't an increase in the dependent. And, if there is an increase in dependency, it is probably more due to other factors, like wealth inequality and bad housing policy than to "incentivization" through social programs. Now, if you want to extend the discussion to those who view themselves entitled to various government benefits that aren't dependent on them, like corporations, I might buy that.
  25. To be honest, I'm not sure any of that is actually true. It is a story that we have been fed. I no longer trust the motives or veracity of those who told us that story. I think there are certain people that are going to feel a stigma or shame, or at least gratitude for charity private or public. And then there are others that are not. And so it has always been and will always be. I do think perhaps that urbanization has concentrated the latter in ghettos, where they are more noticeable and perhaps promulgate a culture of it. And if anything has increased the latter mentality, it is more likely wealth inequality than social programs.
×
×
  • Create New...