Geez, receiving a couple marketing emails would exceed 250kB. Maybe if you were using a text only email client and doing nothing else, and you only get emails from close friends and family, that could be sufficient...
I guess you'd also have to be using a non-smart phone, or you'd have to go in and disable all telemetrics and similar features of every app you used...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe this falls under net neutrality. Net neutrality would only come into play if they were (for example) throttling you for most things but giving you full bandwidth for Twitch.tv and YouTube and Netflix, but nothing else.
You'd have to read the fine print in the agreement you signed. Comcast is one that I'm aware of that says "unlimited" but if you exceed a large amount of data, they'll throttle your speed to something unacceptably low for the remainder of the month. (I believe it used to be 350GB but I can't believe it's still that low.)
Power is then sent to the grid via a subsea cable which also acts as the kite’s tether.
I'd assume this is less disruptive to sea life than this, which appears to just be a giant bollard with a turbine mounted on it sunk into the seabed.
As the article notes, part of the problem with large-scale operations like this in the past is that they disrupted ocean life to a significant degree; this one is different in that it (theoretically) doesn't, since it's smaller and mobile and not tethered to the seabed.
If you're unhappy with the moderation on a given community, make your own competing community, with your own moderation policies. If more people feel strongly about it and agree with your views over the original, they can come to your community instead. There is no overarching 'Lemmy' to ban you; instances are all separate. That's the beauty of Lemmy.
Even if AI companies were to pay the artists and had billions of dollars to do it, each individual artist would receive a tiny amount, because these datasets are so large.
I don't really think that's a problem. If a company is generating $X.00 in revenue using AI generated work, some percentage of that revenue should probably be going to the artists whose work was used in training that model, even if it's a fraction of a fraction of a cent per image generated.
but its just as hard for me to get my shift covered as it is them
However, doing so is in their job description and (presumably) not yours.
Sure, but AI is the hot buzzword right now, so it's got to be shoehorned into every discussion about technology!
The above was a reference to a rather famous instance of George W Bush fumbling over trying to remember the full quite.
I didn't even look at the URL, to be honest; it was the most layman-friendly and succinct article that was from the last few years that popped up in a quick search, but there's plenty of similar articles from other sources if anyone doubts this one.
All I could find on a quick, cursory search was this, from their ToS:
I don't have Comcast, so I can't get any further details.