That’s a good question that I don’t have an answer to as I have no legal training. I’m assuming if you can sign a contract online where the legal text is behind a link and the main offer is what you see… maybe? Technically, it wouldn’t be too difficult to simply erase any mention of a license in a pre-cleaning phase of the data, but I don’t know if the act itself would be an even bigger indication of guilt. There would be no excuse like “oops, I just copied this data into my training set, teehee”. But as I said, not a legal expert.
If there are copyright experts that want to weigh in, I’d be interested to hear their opinion. Given that there are running, unanswered cases (most notably again Microsoft’s Copilot), and Japan on the verge of drafting into law that AI training data can ignore copyright, it’s possible even legal experts would have a hard time answer the question.
I’m putting them here just in case. Only costs me a line carriage and a Ctrl+V.
If there are copyright experts that want to weigh in, I’d be interested to hear their opinion.
Myself as well. It’s a new frontier, legally.
I’m putting them here just in case. Only costs me a line carriage and a Ctrl+V.
Seeing that you have done that made me start to think about doing it myself, as I definitely feel there are days when I’m being shadowed by AI training mechanisms.
But if it doesn’t make any difference legally as a deterrent, then I wouldn’t bother.
Even if it’s ruled illegal in the US, there’s nothing stopping AI companies from moving their operations to Japan where copyright doesn’t apply to training data.
What the person using those links does not realize is that a Creative Commons license relaxes restrictions rather than imposing additional ones.
Everything you create is already protected by copyright by default. If you publish an essay and don’t append any license to it, nobody may republish or remix that essay without your permission, unless an exception like fair use applies. The exact restrictions will depend on local laws.
By using a Creative Commons license, you choose to forgo some of those copyright protections. Thus the comments of the person you replied to are actually less protected than yours or mine.
If you were playing Choplifter in elementary school, you’re really not THAT old. Or you are and that makes me old too, but I’m -hypothetically- completely capable of figuring out piracy. Don’t short yourself, there’s always room on the high seas.
If you were playing Choplifter in elementary school, you’re really not THAT old.
If you had to load Choplifter into your Apple II to play it with a cassette tape recorder, then yes, you are old, you are a first gen computer game player.
To expand on this. If you are talking about anything online it is not private. That doesn’t matter if it’s in a WhatsApp chat, a telegram chat, a Lemmy post, a Facebook feed, etc. as soon as it hits a computer if someone wants to see it they will. There’s just hurdles to get it.
Depends what and how you do it. VPN gives some level of anonymity. TOR even more so. These give you probably greater anonymity than anything else you have in offline live.
Few things more fun than telling people who harp about vaccines being tracking chips that if they’re worried about tracking they should ditch their smartphone, and watching them rage.
You mean the always-on GPS-enabled internet-connected microphone and camera which is also likely Bluetooth and NFC beaconing and contains all of my most personal data including my name, contacts, unencrypted chats facilitated by major cell phone carriers, photos, emails, and other personal files which are also likely synced with a cloud service operated by major multi-national corporations, and also stores biometric data such as facial recognition, fingerprints, time spent sleeping, and even heart rate and number of steps taken assuming you have “fitness” features enabled?
With those last couple items, these massive companies that regularly share data with law enforcement are literally tracking your every step and nearly every beat of your heart.
Well don’t worry about that, I’ve got Express VPN.
Detectives were able to run relatively simple tests to determine that the file had last been saved by a user named “Dennis,” and it had been printed using one of the printers at the nearby Christ Lutheran Church.
Maybe the article is badly worded, but it seems like they got metadata from the file, not the floppy disk itself.
I’m not sure that this is how it works in practice, but ideally: Unless you are registered in their stance / are browsing directly in their website, your client shouldn’t be making any direct requisitions to their instance, so there is nothing they can infer your IP from. (Everything you interact with is comes directly your instance - the only thing that interacts with other instances is the server) That said, it’s possible for some links to direct to the original stance, in which case your client will have to make requests directly to the original instance hosting the content… looking around in this page a bit, it looks like the Community images (banner, icon etc.) are linking directly to the original instance, so I guess that’s a little bit of a problem - but just that shouldn’t be enough information for them to connect the dots between the IP address fetching the image and the account you’re using to browse
Yup. About 7 years ago I used to darkweb pretty hard in the drug scene (I haven’t in years so have at it, Mr. FBI).
Anyway I used Reddit subs a lot for info on new markets and onions, reliable sellers, and news on exit scams etc, but I only lurked - never commented. Anyone with a brain in their head knew they were honeypots.
Oh you overestimate the government. Many systems still running on XP. Our government contracts for our company software are still on versions from 13 years ago.
arstechnica.com
Hot