https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPT4-Chan

What you’re saying is that the government should control access to information, so that people will hold the correct ideology.

I don’t think that’s a game that a liberal democracy can win.

What would a use case look like?

I assume that the latency will make it impractical to train something that’s LLM-sized. But even for something small, wouldn’t a data center be more efficient?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palazzo_Braschi

I think the only way to truly delete anything from reddit would be living in EU and enforcing a GDPR request, but even in that case, I believe it would be very difficult to check they actually comply.

Wouldn’t work. GDPR is not copyright. Deleting the username is enough, unless you have doxed yourself in some post.

Rather, it can be argued that GDPR requires restoring comments at least in some situations. Comments may be necessary context to understand replies or even other posts.

Not quite.

Generally, sites aren’t liable for user generated content as long as they follow some rules. They need to take down illegal content and provide some way of reporting such content. In the US, that’s the whole DMCA takedown thing. The whole content ID thing, that YouTube does, might not be strictly necessary, but it was rolled out in response to a high-stakes lawsuit. The EU is, as always, more strict in these matters.

People are not punished for things beyond their control (but mind that a fine is not the same as damages). If you are sent illegal content, that you have not requested, you shouldn’t expect formal punishment, though the investigation may be punishing in itself. If you simply don’t know how caching works, you’re probably in trouble.

But this was about copyright. I don’t think you get punished anywhere for holding some copyright. Say some Japanese Manga artist travels to some European state where some of their works are illegal. They’re not going to get arrested for that. Anyone who brings such illegal works into the country will not be so lucky, regardless of copyright.

You don’t see why you would need your own servers? Do you see why unauthorized access to a computer system might be illegal?

“Violating copyright without a licence” is a lovely turn of phrase. You must be the valedictorian of the Lemmy School of Copyright.

No. I am not aware of any law that makes you liable by holding or claiming the copyright to some content. EG you may have to pay damages for libel, but not because you have copyright to the libelous statement.

That would be legally possible, though, obviously, you would have to pay for your own servers.

In practice, it wouldn’t be worth anyone’s time.

No. Just because you own a copyright, doesn’t mean that you are entitled to free network services. If you owned the copyright to a movie, would you expect free tickets for any cinema showing it?

Difficult question. I think it’s realistic. Hate speech laws are enforced against individuals on a regular basis. If a German instance tolerated illegal content, then I expect the instance would sooner or later be involved in a prosecution. The prosecution would be against the user, though. The instance would only have to provide data to police. I’m not sure at what point the instance owners themselves would be found to violate these laws.

Apart from that, the instance is required to remove illegal content per the DSA. I think it’s realistic to expect that a prosecution would lead to a closer look at the instance.

I almost didn’t copy the update because my focus was on the technical background. I did a double-check before submitting, if I caught the gist correctly, and decided that people would probably want to know that the report triggered that change.

Useless article, but at least they link the source: https://localmess.github.io/

We disclose a novel tracking method by Meta and Yandex potentially affecting billions of Android users. We found that native Android apps—including Facebook, Instagram, and several Yandex apps including Maps and Browser—silently listen on fixed local ports for tracking purposes.

These native Android apps receive browsers’ metadata, cookies and commands from the Meta Pixel and Yandex Metrica scripts embedded on thousands of web sites. These JavaScripts load on users’ mobile browsers and silently connect with native apps running on the same device through localhost sockets. As native apps access programatically device identifiers like the Android Advertising ID (AAID) or handle user identities as in the case of Meta apps, this method effectively allows these organizations to link mobile browsing sessions and web cookies to user identities, hence de-anonymizing users’ visiting sites embedding their scripts.

📢 UPDATE: As of June 3rd 7:45 CEST, Meta/Facebook Pixel script is no longer sending any packets or requests to localhost. The code responsible for sending the _fbp cookie has been almost completely removed.

Most people don’t care about locked-down tech. They don’t have the skills necessary to use anything open, and that’s fine. You have to pick what you do with your limited time.

OTOH, many people want to have control over their data. That means having control over other people’s computers. It’s not just the copyright industry demanding money, or Big Tech building walled gardens. You can see a lot of users on Lemmy demanding that kind of control. That means that computing devices of all kinds must become more locked-down and remote-controllable.

So that’s where I see us going.

He didn’t write that to teach but to vent. The intended audience is people who already know.

For more information on ChatGPT’s current capabilities, consult the API docs. I found that to be the most concise source of reliable information. And under no circumstances, believe anything about AI that you read on Lemmy.

Kudos for being willing to learn.

For the purposes of this Regulation:

‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;

GDPR

Anything connected to your username is personal data. Your votes, posts, comments, settings subscriptions, and so on, but only as long as they are or can be actually connected to that username. Arguably, the posts and comments that you reply to also become part of your personal data in that they are necessary context. Any data that can be connected to an email address, or an IP address, is also personal data. When you log IPs for spam protection, you’re collecting personal data.

It helps to understand the GDPR if you think about data protection rights as a kind of intellectual property. In EU law, the right to data protection is regarded as a fundamental right of its own, separate from the right to privacy. The US doesn’t have anything like it.

Federation means that personal data is sent to anyone who spins up an instance. What legal basis is there for that? These guys and their lawyers weren’t able to figure one out.

I don’t really see how this ruling is helpful. The reasoning seems to confirm the view that the Fediverse is legally very problematic.

It depends on where they did it, but probably yes. They had the right to do it in Japan, for example.