Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:F-droid has it (Score 1) 60

At the surface level, I disagree. Smartphones are ubiquitous and there are a LOT of people using them that don't understand the risks.

A LOT of people don't understand risks OS vendors pose to their privacy, security and safety. Nor do they understand the opportunity costs they pay for allowing unfair monopolization of marketplaces where a single company gets carte blanch to do as they please while everyone else is held captive to their whims.

As someone that has to support those people, I support Play Store apps being more restrictive.

The play store is the very reason for race to the bottom incentive structures resulting in app stores full of malware existing primarily for data exfiltration. If the OS vendors cared about "people" they would provide users with necessary controls to prevent apps from exerting take it or leave it demands upon users. They instead side with app vendors at every turn because it makes them money.

That said, I think Android's current methods of allowing 3rd party apps/stores could be improved. I don't know what the best solution would be, but something like a security option to enable "less secure" apps in the store could work.

How do you know app stores or apps are less secure? Less secure than what? Less secure than stock Android + GPS where everything including basic official Google calculator and keyboard apps spy on you?

Comment Re:I cannot see this stopping the AI spiders (Score 1) 212

Sounds like an opportunity for someone to make the first clean,

Sounds like a fools errand.

legal AI then.

In the US copyright constrains only performances and reproductions of works and their derivatives. It does not otherwise constrain what others may do with the work itself or with information extracted from the work. This includes any styles, concepts, ideas or knowledge embodied in that work.

It might take you 10 years of painstaking investigation to surface new knowledge at great expense not previously known to the world. The second you publish the fruits of your investigation into a work... only the work is protected not the underlying knowledge. Anyone can read your work and blab the same facts to the world without obtaining any license or permission.

Comment Re:Where's SpaceX? (Score 1) 12

If you look at what it is it's a concrete runway, in the middle of nowhere, with a few fancy-looking curved structures around the periphery.

Oh, and a cool-sounding name.

This isn't so much a "how we will grow" but more a "please someone find a use for this".

Comment Re:I have said that for ages (Score 1) 212

Only to get ridiculed by some AI fanboi assholes, with deranged claims about "learning" and other ludicrous claims. Nice to see the actual experts recognize the problem as well. Take that, AI morons.

"In the Office's view, training a generative AI foundation model on a large and diverse dataset will often be transformative." ~United States copyright office.

Comment Re:I cannot see this stopping the AI spiders (Score 1) 212

Effective enforcement is easy. Just make some severe penalties for doing it, and crucially for using AI that has been trained on unlicensed material.

Unlicensed material means basically everything.

The same rules will apply to foreign made AIs of course.
The EU does that and it has proven successful with things like GDPR.

There are no foundation models having not been trained on "unlicensed material".

Comment Fair use isn't even necessary to train AI (Score 1) 212

If you train your AI by showing it copyrighted works without making a fixed copy of the work in the process there is no violation of copyright. Even if you show it stolen material you don't own or have the rights to while there may be legal liability for theft that also isn't a copyright problem.

Comment Re:china wins when that happens as you need buy an (Score 1) 81

That's how you can tell when something is incredibly stupid, when it has the word "challenge" at the end and is spread via social media. I'm just waiting for the Running Head-first Into a Concrete Wall Challenge and the Put a Shotgun in your Mouth and Pull the Trigger Challenge to take off.

Comment Re:Opt-in would be getting in fast lane ... (Score 1) 22

That's already the standard in a lot of countries. All the fast lane does is check that your image matches the one in the identity document, nothing more. And by fast I mean actually fast, not just "called fast" - time from leaving the plane to picking up my luggage can be as little as five minutes.

The weird thing with this is that it was the US who forced the entire world to adopt biometric passports post-911, and now they're left behind using humans squinting at you at the end of long queues at their borders. Where you have no rights and they can detain you and seize your property, but at least they can't automatically match you to your passport.

Slashdot Top Deals

Elliptic paraboloids for sale.

Working...