Coincidentally, OOP just explained academic publishing to a T.
post
That is how capitalism works.
The American Weather Service provided weather updates for free, but a company came along and just started copying what the weather service posted ... then sued the Weather Service for publicly posting the weather because the government is not allowed to provide a service for free that a company can charge for.
Insanity.
the government is not allowed to provide a service for free that a company can charge for
I am beyond mildly infuriated by such an idiotic stance, but it tracks with what I’ve seen.
RIP postal service you’re next.
Government issues the business licenses. Seems like someone needs to be reminded who has who by the balls.
In case anyone didn't know the answer is business as in business has the government by the balls.
As intended by the founding fathers, of course
That's exactly right, and it's clearly why they intentionally decided to let the businesses have guns and gave them all the other rights in the constitution, knowing they would someday be declared to be actual "people" by a series of what must be the stupidest and most destructive legal precedents ever set in the history of humanity.
Yup. Government has businesses by the balls.
But corruption exists.
Therefore the goverment only ever really pulls small businesses and normal people by the balls, while the big businesses and uber rich (money heavyweights) get to pull the government by the tongue. Sometimes even the balls as well.
Just as Supply Side Jesus intended.
State governments issue business licenses. This is how we will kill Citizen's United.
Hawaii first, Montana next.
It all makes sense when you realize that AI isn’t the product, control is.
When everyone depends on cloud services, especially storage, because they can’t afford hard drives or RAM anymore. Do you think the average normie is going to “stand up for principles of privacy and freedom of computing” or are they gonna say “it is what it is” and buy a tablet with 8GB of RAM and an office suite in the cloud?
Do you think these companies are above scanning everyone’s stuff to find out who is against them? Who is developing some great new idea? Who dissents the government?
Do you think these companies are above editing all saved copies of a news article and replacing it with something AI generated that looks real enough to memory hole something? (Copies of things in the cloud are already de-duplicated)
They don’t want us to be able to point out their flaws anymore. They want us to be submissive to them.
Where have you been the last 20 years?
I have indeed noticed Google (and Google-based search engines like Startpage) has got worse in the past months. Even DuckDuckGo is better now (which as a long time ddg user is wild)
Honestly ddg has also gotten worse (as it’s bing in a condom), it’s just that Google has shit itself even harder
Kagi is a paid service and feels weird to pay for a search engine, but things have felt so much better since I tried them out months ago.
I don't know if you use their Assistant, but you can limit it to specific sources. The first option after the entire web is the fediverse. They also have the small web, which just shows you things made by actual humans, not something trying to sell you something.
I pay for Metager and i do really recommend it. You pay a pittance per search while being free of the crap that infests the net. Kagi comes with it's own set of issues.
I’ll look into Metager as this is the first I’ve heard of it.
What set of issues do you see with Kagi? It’s the best I’ve encountered as of late, but if there’s more I should consider; I’d like to learn.
I mainly find their CEO problematic, and their focus on AI does not bode well for the future.
Thank you for sharing. I do now recall a couple of the items you addressed, and I’ll have to keep others in mind.
We can’t have anything nice… google, digg, Reddit, github, Kagi, proton mail. —at one point in time these were good. The rot or trajectory of rot seems inevitable.
I’m not anti AI, but it doesn’t need to be in everything all the time. It shouldn’t obfuscate data sources. It shouldn’t be allowed to consume and gather everything breaking laws that would apply to any individual and ought to be enforced for any corporate entity.
Pointing an AI at a larger company’s documentation or feeding a local one a largish manual and using it to figure out how or why 2, 3, or 4 parts work together has been useful for me in the past. Again where I can then get to the data to learn for myself.
Letting the pattern recognization machine (AI) assess a logfile or 3 that are intertwined to help find issues has been helpful.
Injecting it into every internet search where I never asked is wasteful and stupid.
Just wanted to make sure you know that this isn't my blog.
I agree. Machine learning is something very useful! It's sad that the moment a computer was able to spit out coherent sentences, humanity lost their minds. I specifically have a grudge against Altman and Amodei - the intentionally misleading statements suggestive of this being the way of getting an AGI really did a number on society.
I started noticing ddg search with the "" operator is wonky. Also ecosia seems to have a lot of sponsored results?
I'm at a point where I gladly pay for my search engine just to get good results.
One could argue we were always paying, with our data. But now we get less in return.
To be fair, Google has been fighting a war against SEO and spam basically since it was started.
I don't think they intentionally degraded their search engine. I think they just diverted resources away from fighting spam and SEO and instead dedicated those resources to AI stuff. Intentionally degrading their search results would require work. They'd have to convince their high-paid employees that for some reason they should make the results worse. But, just letting the stuff rot naturally as SEOs kept up their attacks, that's free.
There is a license that says that all derivatives must also be open source.
But also AI companies don't care about the law, they stole all their data, engage in insider trading, circular trading, and generating all manner of illegal content, they don't give a fuck. And the US government isn't doing anything to hold them accountable, infact the president is getting in on it.
And the US government is doing anything
isn't doing anything
And the US government is doing anything to hold them accountable
You probably meant "nothing" instead of "anything"?
Yes, all this is very much the product of the current US admin.
they stole all there data
Obviously fuck the capitalists and AI scammers. But reading and learning from a library, then writing and selling your own book based on that is NOT stealing. It's the wrong argument.
The answer obviously is to keep the actual source material and libraries and book archives open and just run open source AI models at home. You can run smaller versions on a solar powered PC no problem.
The issue with trying to make "AI is just stolen" happen is that it will make open source AI models illegal. AI companies would love that because they can afford to license and pay or work around or obscure or whatever. The "intellectual property" argument is always a disgusting capitalist one. Knowledge is either free or nothing is.
Library implies consent that was not there and access to the public that was not there.
Every book ever published, every article anybody ever wrote, every comment anyone ever posted on a public internet is "consent" to read and learn from it.
I'm pro piracy as you can tell. The idea that something can be out there publicly on the internet but it's "not consent" to read is the intellectual property one. Look at how they try to gatekeep publicly owned scientific papers. Big AI is clearly hypocritical doing this, but corporations are just soulless, amoral programs executed by sentient humans.
But the RESULT of all that (e.g. deepseek) should belong to all people. And THAT is why these IP arguments by fuckAI are dangerous, because it is only a threat to open models. The answer is open source (or weight) AI models and with advances in computing to run them locally.
Every gps ping your phone sells to ad companies? Every nanny cam that is connected to the cloud?
Public information vs private information
Are you a troll, you just said their is no such thing.
I said no such thing. Private is private. I'm saying there is no such thing as public information, information that you put on the public internet, meaning for the public to see, then being somehow not "free".
You can argue about copyright a little, I'm against it, but this has nothing to do with private messages or private information or data protection.
You're just arguing a strawman and trying to make the discussion about something else and an ad hominem calling me a troll.
All I said in the original comment was stolen data and you are the one that decided I meant "public data available to on the open Internet" and started arguing against that. Who is arguing with a strawman here?
You wrote "they stole all their data". Since they mostly use publicly available data like books, articles, papers, internet forums, social media (all public info) it must mean they "stole" that public data.
Which means you believe that data should be intellectual property and belong to someone like meta or reddit (who else?). This is exactly what the oligarchs want.
Except these people are turning around and burningdown the libraries once they've read all the books.
Well yeah, they suck. I'm a fan of anna's archive.
But this doesn't change the fact that AI models will continue to improve, and the tactical question is if we give them munition to monopolize it using "intellectual property" rights. I want open source/weights models to use locally without paying some license to meta or reddit or some publisher cartel.
Large amounts of data were pirated, which is apparently legal if you're training an AI. Source: Meta lawsuit
But reading and learning from a library, then writing and selling your own book based on that is NOT stealing. It’s the wrong argument.
A powerful argument if one cannot tell the difference between a person and a product.
I think this is the story of humanity. It ain't getting better until we massacre the inhumanly rich, eat Thier families while the world watches, and force evil socialism on shared intellectual property
Follow me for more bad advice
I don't know the difference between bad advice and good advice anymore
Styrofoam and diesel are great for toppling governments. Douse the rich!
Don’t use diesel. It’s hard to ignite with just a lighter. Use gasoline and styrofoam for your homemade bonfire starter. It’ll ignite much easier and stick to all those logs that tend to hoard…leaves.
Good advice. We are basically giving them their plastics and petrochemicals back at no cost.
... To the logs
Be careful with gasoline. It's flammable enough for the flame to climb up the spout. Ask me how i know, kids are dumb... (i.e. me circa age 10)
Don't actually eat anyone, cannabalism is likely to lead to prion folding diseases. Which is a terrible way to die.
See, here's the thing. Everybody loves to point at the guilitine, and the French Revolution. They love to say "Lets do what they did!"
Here's the problem. Nobody talks about what came next.
Because what happened was, you had one group of rich assholes who controlled everything, and treated everybody else like shit. So the French chopped off their heads, and got rid of these rich assholes.
And what happened next? Well, a lot of infighting, but the end result was instead of having a group of rich assholes controlling everyone, you instead had a different group of not rich assholes controlling everyone, who thengot rich from it. And nothing changed.
I think, before we go around killing everyone, we need a plan. We need to figure out why humans are so quick to all clump up as one submissive blob, who follows the will of whoever claims to have power.
Instead of 1 president, or 1 dictator, I think we should instead have a panel of 1 million people. Tens of thousands of people from every state. Anyone can apply, and if need be, your individual county can run sn election if you're not running unopposed.
This I think would cut down tremendously on corruption in our government. Because a company couldn't just bribe 1 president. They'd need to bribe 1 million people.
And the comittee would always represent the people, because they ARE the people. Most people would know at least 1 committee member in their neighborhood.
THEN you can kill all the rich assholes.
Wealth cap or bust. No one should ever be able to make 1 billion. I think there should be forced divestments after 1 bil and you're barred from the stock market for 5 years. Plus☝🏻, if you use any money to build anything whether it be a building or a business, said billionaire is not allowed to earn more than a total of 1 million/yr.
That sounds like a cat and mouse game. You make a rule that person A can't be on the stock market for 5 years. This does two things. First, it causes rich people to find some loophole or exploit.
And second, it just disincentivizes them from using the stock market at all, in favor of some unregulated form of making money. Like crypto.
Now you could say "Well then we'll place caps on how much you can trsnsfer crypto over to american currency".
And now you're in a cat and mouse game. Because now they just need to convert it to some foreign currency. Then convert the foreign currency to American currency.
See? Cat and mouse.
See, this idea thread is putting up fences to seperate the corrupt from illicit gains. You build a fence, they bring a ladder. You build a bigger fence, they bring a bigger ladder. You build a wall, they install a window. The incentive is always there to overcome the barrier.
Instead, we should be finding ways to make bringing a bigger ladder cost more than the gains. Rewrite the whole system so that all people benefit before the greedy have a chance to hoard it all.
Regulate every system. Regulate every persons finances. If they cheat the system, make them pay twice the gains they got. Then distribute those fines to fund education and poor neighborhoods.
Suddenly you don't need to worry about how big their ladder is, because the juice isn't worth the squeeze.
What do you mean by forced divestments?
Oh and are you going to hard code these numbers into the law? Because rich people would respond by deflating the currency to the point where the average person makes 10 cents a day and a millionaire is inflation-equivalent to a billionaire today.
Or they’ll split a 10 billion dollar company between 20 of their closest friends and family, 500 million each, to stay under the cap.
Or a thousand other loopholes people will use. Take a company private and just declare it at worth only a million.
forced divestments
Selling off half their stocks or ¼ of their their majority share to lower their stake in their own businesses so their wealth is stifled.
This only sounds good to people who are ignorant of both economics and history. Wealth caps, rent control, fixed prices, etc all sound nice until you take a minute to learn about the side effects. These sorts of policies aren't knew, but they don't work which is why they haven't stuck around.
The French Revolution was succesful. What the king & nobles did before that was much, much worse.
It just wasn't a socialist revolution. The bourgeoisie won.
It also didn't happen just like that, it took 10 years - Wikipedia calls it "a period of political and societal change". I think it's fair to say it wasn't completely unplanned.
It led directly to Napoleon conquering Europe and crowning himself Emperor of France...
Yeah, so?
If you're saying "not good enough", I repeat: much better than the Ancien régime was.
No, my point was the French revolution wasn't exactly a success because it was followed by two other revolutions in 1830 and 1848 that also aimed at overthrowing the monarchy.
The majority of people don’t like to lead. It’s simply easier and more comfortable to follow. Less conflict. Less confrontation. Less stress.
Leading requires initiative, the capacity to be confrontational, to step outside the box. It’s rather opposite of what is known as the bandwagon effect. Most people cannot do any of that without feeling extremely self conscious or anxious. Or, without being obnoxious and off-putting. You not only have to be able to function separate, you have to do it without annoying the fuck out of those around you.
Effective leadership also requires the capacity for some degree of speed. Some problems cannot wait for debate due to safety.
The bandwagon effect is a fun bit of study. What’s even better is the majority of people believe it doesn’t hold sway over them when the data shows that it absolutely does, something like 70-80%. It’s why, in part, so much money is thrown at AI and bots on social media, especially pre elections.
This appears to be a long but solid definition of it, with some easy bullet points: https://www.researchprospect.com/what-is-the-bandwagon-effect/
There’s also a reverse bandwagon effect, for, you know, the cool people.
There needs to be a little killing first, to set the tone. I like your ideas, but there is no way in this world or any other that the rich assholes would allow you to assemble a committee like that. They would literally carpet bomb it before allowing it.
Humanity actually successfully implemented a decentralized egalitarian socialist society without dictatorships in 1936 Spain, which bore out that Anarchist political theory is the most viable long-term solution we have to achieving freedom for all while also ensuring everyone is able to live a fulfilling life by providing free housing, food, transportation and healthcare.
Nobody talks about what came next.
Most of the monarchies and aristocrats in Europe fell / lost all real power / reformed themselves to avoid losing their heads?
We need to figure out why humans are so quick to all clump up as one submissive blob, who follows the will of whoever claims to have power.
because people like when decisions are made for them, and they don't have to think to make those decisions for themselves.
Dibs on ribs
Welcome to the world of scientific publishing, long before AI. Except authors even have to pay for creating "content", and reviewers are expected to work for free. Yet article access is sold at astronomical prices.
Hey, remember that time Aaron Swartz used public APIs and perfectly legal aggregation of information to compile scientific journals in a data set outside the paywall. And he was arrested, prosecuted, and threatened with life in prison until he (allegedly) killed himself?
Then his original and highly lucrative pet project, Reddit, was mutated into a propaganda factory by the Epstein Class, cannibalized by the Investor Class, and gutted for AI slop by the Tech Sector?
At least, academic papers give credits to the author... Or to the author's boss
I don't even know why they charge such high prices.
I don't work in academia but I am curious about thing and look up papers all the time.
I have never bought a single one at those ridiculous prices. But if they were reasonable like $1-$3 or something I probably would have an di imagine a lot of people would have.
You make more if 100 people buy a $1 item than 3 people buying a $30 item and the world benefits more.
Once you understand that AI is limited to the questioner's ability to properly elucidate what they need to know you'll have several more botched concrete stair resurfacings.
Thanks Gemini, you self-contradicting potato
Gemini: "yes, an important distinction - you have made the critical observation that I am useless!"
20 years? More like somewhere between 30 to 40 if we count early WWW and the Gopher+Usenet that came before it. The GPL isn't quite that old, but the spirit behind it sure is. If we count early home-computer clubs back in the 70's (like the one that birthed the original Apple) or the ham-radio crowd that came before it, we can push into 50+ year territory, easy.
I hadn't considered AI being a paywall around the whole WWW but now that you mention it, it kind of looks that way. I've opined elsewhere that social media companies (e.g. Facebook) are building walled-gardens to keep eyeballs and attention-spans locked on their brand of reality. This would just be another avenue of attack in that strategy.
The library is still there. Admission is still free.
while the library itself is covered in a thick layer of slop as the librarian can't keep up anymore and the road signs pointing at the library are taken down
the library was run on donations and someone copied all the books and is selling a service that summarizes them on a lot right in front of it. you can still go around and give your donation inside but most people don't and the library is starting to fall apart. also the summaries kind of suck.
Only 20 years? My techguyforum screen name is damn near 30 years old at this point. (Don't go there. Site is ruined trash, now. ) I been giving info to help with shit since even before then. Internet has my fingerprints in it since the early 90's.
They are also trying to take away these free resources by pushing laws to make ID identification mandatory to make money off of us.
And the people charging admission are also hemorrhaging money.
Weird fucking timeline.
I think their hope is if they pull it off they won't need money anymore, because they'll have destroyed the last lever of power the working class still have: the ability to withhold their labour. LLMs are trying to turn labour into just another tool (that you rent).
top 98 comments