or replying to week-old comments by someone doing the thing I find annoying.
Again, its five days since you posted your comment, not a week, and its just seen by me for the first time about two hours ago.
or replying to week-old comments by someone doing the thing I find annoying.
Again, its five days since you posted your comment, not a week, and its just seen by me for the first time about two hours ago.
Also, this is my new signature line, so thanks.
You're welcome. I appreciate you helping out with normalizing signature lines.
The point you felt was worth making a week later
Again, five days ago. Some people like myself stumble upon a post/comment days and days later from when its initially posted.
is that I am free to block someone who does something I find kind of annoying?
Yeah, for some reason people who complain about me using a license seem to keep forgetting that option, but instead just continue to complain, for some strange reason, no matter how many times I remind them of that option. Thought it was a good PSA to remind the complainers they they have alternatives to complaining.
That seems a little extreme to me.
If that seems extreme to you, then you need to touch grass more often.
Extreme would be continuing to complain about something that you have the power to change, but don't change.
What is that point?
at the very least it’s way less annoying to see it on a website than it is under every comment
You’re free to block those that use the license, if you find it annoying to see.
You’re free to reply to a week-old comment, too, but neither is a great idea
Actually, five days, not a week.
And also, sometimes its just about making a point, even if you stumble upon something later on. 🤷
at the very least it’s way less annoying to see it on a website than it is under every comment
You're free to block those that use the license, if you find it annoying to see.
what are you going to do? Sue?
Personally? I let Creative Commons know what's going on, that their licenses are being ignored.
I'm pretty sure they'd have something to say about the matter.
Ah well then I might try and find a license that doesn’t require attribution because I don’t care about that part.
I would argue attribution is also really important, as it forces them to expose publicly how they're training their models, bringing awareness.
Nice off-topic comment. Pretty sure by now everybody is aware of that (and other posts) on the topic of using a license.
n the meantime I’ve been changing my post sort from Active, to Top Posts in the Past 12 Hours.
If you set it to 'New' Lemmy becomes a whole new place.
for fun I ran this through GPT just to see what it’d say. Not that I would trust it to be correct ever, but it’s interesting getting an “outside opinion” about this.
I'm don't believe an "outside opinion" from an AI company's product, about if an AI company has the legal right to ignore a content's license and scrape the content to program their models, would be unbiased, and should not be trusted, as you've stated.
Attempting to agree to disagree, and move on.
From the article...
That's what it comes down to, right there.
Google needs to spend money on people, and not just rely on the AI automation, because it's obviously getting things wrong, its not judging context correctly.
~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~