Jawboning and a Retrospective of facing the mob

Skull for memory, No reference. Continuing the diplomacy or discourse of AI, well, On here atleast.

Have you watched Alex Avile and the backlash to the backlash to the backlash? Welp, you are in it right now, I've been trying to build bridges. I'd recommend you watch this before you become here.

I must commend Alex for not taking his video down, this odd collusion of hollywood conservatives that are hijacking and destroying movements needs to be noted.

(Cw, human rights rambling from a tired couch. Including a bit of a socialist analyst) Aaah, The defeatist, misrablist dead end of copyright, if Harlen can call them the 7th circle of hell with publishers, maybe I can place a spicy opinion here.

 Silence is capital, another monopoly, when everybody is trying to build trust on the internet, the editorial confessions roll out. Along with the drab examination of the liberal centrists who'd happen to defend the private proporty relations from consolidating commidy value, oh, such a thing that you could state

Journalists don't owe the entertainment media pr any slack. Alex Avile self-publishing that Nickles group disclosure. With such is the diplomatic to the copyright maximalists that he got crudded on. It's always a game, troll bait, and a hornets nest that does not have. He did not sign a non-disclosure deal unlike those of the copyright alliance did so he did a community service.

There's something awfully centrist with publishers wanting to consolidate the means of distribution then raise the commodity value of art, really? Is that the culture industry, I do commodity fetishism

From Deepdreamnights, a public domain artists.

"The anti-AI side isn't actually anti-AI, they're pro-regulatory-capture-of-AI-by-Megacorporations. The copyright anti-AI argument conveniently leaves it open for Disney, Warner Bros, Nintendo, Sony, the RIAA, all to make their own AI systems to lower their production costs, because they own more than enough material to make powerful datasets.
They get it, you don't, worst of all possible worlds."

imsobadatnicknames2

It was actually a very thematically important foreshadowing arc setting up the Online Artist Community™'s tragic descent into the very thing they sought to destroy (people who want to expand the digital mechanisms to enforce the concept of ownership of .jpgs)

So yes, in light of this new info, I'll be keeping a meter at the CYA copyright enforcement that will only entail a unsafer internet. It's there to empower publishers, not the artists.

‪xormetric‬ ‪@tentacle.expert‬· 08/01/2024
SMALL ARTISTS ARE NOT PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT copyright is a monopoly. to make a living, artists sell that monopoly to publishers. Thereby losing the right to their own art. Copyright is enforced in court. Taking someone to court costs money. Who, of the small artist and the corporation, has money?"

There are plenty of rights more important than copyright, freedom of expression is one of them, including the freedom to assembly and to protest. Yet it's alarming, so I'll keep a head low her and be sure to differentiate the western artists from the lower working classes.

It's why I've not been posting much, there are absurd paranoia brewing, and it's getting bleak, so sense of discussion as there no's certainty on this issue. Odd activities like Style phrenology along with echo chambers, doing research on this topic like it matters, people need to know the community service of Couch Gregor.

Yet this dirt-digging and wild speculation of ad-hominins only means that they're creating a spectre of free like Nintendo does with its own copyright, only that will understand that this time it's left everybody on the statecraft map in disarray.

I'll leave out with another quote retweet. It's a understatment that this DRM enforcement is going to accidentally be the most second order pro-ai, the bad pro-ai move that's going be, a worser regime overall.

So freedom of expression > copyright, the publishing script puts too much in the hands of publishers and record labels.

‪@valkyrie.hacker.gf‬
Follow
we're literally going to get mandatory DRM brain implants at this rate


B-Bonus retweet.
Erica "digifox" Kovac

I feel weird being in the "middle" on the AI Argument. The hype machine is out of control, but the anti-AI crowd is almost as crazy with the only redeeming quality being that they have very little control over anything.

I think that generative AI is anywhere from "a cute toy" to "mildly useful in limited contexts" and that Big Tech companies did nothing wrong in training genAI models the way they did because a stricter reading of fair use would risk disallowing many types of transformative work.

I think that the way it's being deployed by the hype-mongers is frequently irresponsible and sometimes deliberately attempting to provoke backlash. I think the long-term destabilizing impacts are minor compared to the overreaction dynamics at play currently.

Like the video model demo from OpenAI recently where they generated a fake closed circuit video of Sam Altman stealing GPUs from BestBuy or w/e seems like it must've been calculated to spook people.

  (My response to the hype mongers is well, sex sells, for better or worse.)

Ted Underwood‬ ‪@tedunderwood.com‬· 55m

Based on social media, you might think the US was in the middle of a Butlerian Jihad. But IRL neither party has shown much appetite for regulating AI; universities aren't trying to ban it; content industries are adapting to it. The venting is anti-correlated with change.

This is why no one is writing 10k words a week to counter Zitron's ~10k words about the uselessness of models, inevitability of collapse, &c. You don't need to write 10k words every week arguing that the moon should continue to orbit the earth. People who like the moon's orbit can chill.

I look at Alex Avile for speaking the truth, yet the Tailism of other entertainers along with the inanity of media monopolists. Those who consolidate the distribution. Means That one should always caution with publishers being friendly, there is already an agonise going on.

A solution for Ai-identity, Anti-trust Egalitarian. Links.

Rawwr Kyro is doing his ranting here with notes on Tech Journalism.(If you're new, check out my other notes on AI and licence in the search bar)

I must do this the strawman to feel carthesis to my audience.
(image from Deja 98 Rom hack)

MuH FREEDOMS'n HuSTle'n  Propyright rights MICKY MOU- 

CRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCNCCCNCN Free Palestine! (Thats the thing, ain't it? It's not so simple as a dunk tweet or a microblog post It merely entertainment right?)

Let me clear some conceptual confusion.

A little petering out with News, welcome to journalism. It could be going completely public domain as things go on. The denialism and copyright self abnegation a defeatist dead-end, especially with the copyright-lets-be-under-the-kind-monopoly-of-disneys/nintendo-content-id-drm sort. I feel like I'm talked down like a child by westy liberals.

As copyright there to consolidate the distribution into capital.

‪@tentacle.expert‬

"SMALL ARTISTS ARE NOT PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT copyright is a monopoly. to make a living, artists sell that monopoly to publishers. Thereby losing the right to their own art. Copyright is enforced in court. Taking someone to court costs money. who, of the small artist and the corporation, has money?"

 Aaah doctrinaires'n the anarchists, what to do. Always leaning in the sympathy of the Anarchist. Nightmare, asymmetric enforcement. What will happen when DRM and the commodification of scraping by big content will do? Will I'm not affiliated with that union like Lenin was. Class character first.

Are people in for a rude awakening once this DRM is applied?

Also, ain't Eddy Zetron and his bubble narrative bogus? NFT =/= Prosumer Gen Ai. Well, I've never listened to him anyway. He's still wiggling Coe? Meh.
...

(Now that I thnk about it, encruddificaton seems more like a absurd concept, even when I wrote about it. My hypocrisy alarm bells of a contradictory axis are going off. The only thing he's doing this is for his self-service now.)

I'm using my right in the editorial that hes... infamous grifting. The nft/genai comparison has done so much damage to the discourse. I've written about

Oh, he's got a diaper burping fetish, at least with my entertainment I put it under the legalese that it's fiction.

He's name-searching and sending petty malpractice insults. Why is he the prophet and gospel to anti-ai dogma?

I'm outta there!

Well visual media has its own drawbacks, cartoon discourse ain't conductive, and it ain't hiding the malpractice of the dog piles I'm seeing on Bluesky I don't know why I'd say this. I'm not going to answer the dismissive hustling, it's not for me. Such is a mob rule and the wilful disinformation now.

"Just let me work! Anything. Desperate. Make me silly mindless entertainment. Do whatever specification you want sire, anything to serve! I want job. I need to prescribe as-written instructions"

Texas sharpshooter Fallacy anyone with this discourse with the talking points refuted?Does microblogging facilitate it. It's why I don't post some of these blog posts there. The biggest danger is that the discourse and comprehension they are getting are from a meme, and that's the discourse now.

Twitter and bluesky have destroyed discourse so that's, why I try to limit myself, it's indulging in the techmonoplitic manipulations that Neil Postman warned about in amusing ourselves to death.

Please, denialism and hustle ain't going to answer this question west, expertise going to lead ahead. "It's boring and it will go away!" Nope. I learned with the NFT stuff that this stuff is still present.

Oh, Even now, it feels like excuses to hustle more.

Even with the crash, will it be lose-lose (that's how a doomerist views it, I take it as neutral continuously.) 

This article goes into the prosumer, marketing terms design for direct response and says these are statistical inference.

Or not, this site says it's within the reach of knowledge and the emergent intelligence, or it's Inference of curational decryption matter. Arg.

Link on don't be a A**hole of impossible principle and ideals. By my reflection of this thread on Tumblr. Paternalistic inspiration P*** will not be tolerated within my platform.

I'm going to check the nuanced AI feed and do check out the for you feed too which is better than the discover feed too.

(Oh, I look and try and digest takes) Such as this retweet. I don't retweet in bluesky because of the fickle followers. You are one of the good ones though, who can trust an editorial and an opinion and not a short, quippy and wrong dismissal. I'm entertaining Neil Postman's amusing ourselves to death when I'm using that format.

‪@eleanor.lockhart.contact‬
another thing people don't realize when they fantasize about "the AI crash" is that you're going to see a *lot* more slop and harmful use of AI whenever the big companies do crash, because the crash would drop GPU prices drastically & make cybercriminals etc. training models much, much cheaper"

Oh, that is an idea with all these marketing predictions, something to take account for a preparation.

According to this Test which I felt it was polarising and misrepresentative, I entertained it again. Did my own Ai-identity, which reflected my one and only position. You're free to take it.

Many takes on the thread.

Another Typology as an intuition pump to understand this.

Find myself in agreement to this.

Now as Anil Dash with his own decentralised AI models that are plural, is it forbidden of Green version? Remix culture'n all that I lean on.

He even linked to the video, antitrust leads to trust, I take it.

Welp, Good luck with that with Really Good AI. Kyro will do what he does, Squashinghe west military industry complex.

I'll prepare for a new doomerist movement. I'm not going to associate with this anti-vaxx that's left coded, it's malpractice. Not much vision for the future other than the eternal present. This will cause hijacking and destruction.

‪Key 🗝 🦊‬ ‪@keytryer.net‬· 2d
Current anti-technological trends have no imagination of what the world looks like after this. They want an eternal y2k and an artificial ban on computation. "It doesn't matter if you cure cancer, if no one can be a doctor anymore." It's bleak to me.

Unless we build an alternative.

There will be, as an antitrust egalitarian I propose a right to the city

oh look my EFF stickers have arrived

Regardless, the discourse has regressed on Bluesky. Thank you for reading my rant.

Looking within licensing guffaw witin the knowledge economy 🛋🔎

Does nor exist, economists log off. There is the knowledge domain. What they ain't is a scarcity of knowledge. Such a scarcity with what is able to be searched today.

Such a dubious concept, along with the attempt of an intellectual monopoly and monopsony. As if thought can be controlled. Such a matter with idea's concepts and style that are too broad to be categorized with a thing.

This brings a division, on how these matters where tutors tell other artists to use reference, yet not when it comes to copyright, our that such a matter concerned with its own withering and the means to monetize.

These are the alternative laws with regard to displacement with others, with defendants can in regard to maximalism of licensing laws.

From Alix Aviles* second video.

Oh dear, looks like it's going to be a combination of AI and Copyright, yet with such licensing laws there's going to have to be a reimagining with them. Or circumnavigating them, as it merely will make fan iterations impossible.

Copying non-commercially was forever a practice within classical academics, I've done sight size method myself as a manner of teaching Copying were to mean to bring design patterns and their aesthetic axiologies into a new repeatably and consistency.
Copying will help transform and merge

A scientist goes does deep down of the ideology of libertarian, western thought - pro capitalist thought left behind via Ayn Rand. Well, I could draw a line down there, Adam does not know how that from Steven Jay Gould and to the moment of our technocracy of yearning for a sense of control, a matter that transcends copyright and the licensing laws of the ownership to our attention and the control of it with our attentional facilities

That reminds me when it's comes to AI within the idea of making our own ideas with controlling the conversation, aiming for the outsider.

1:34 hours (Yeah there was criticism where the sponsor previously, yet welcome to the machine of entertainment that we live in. )
*Anywhere, here's the vid

That's curious, that was a different definition of accelerationist, (Maybe he's using a different definition which I don't hold. The direct action plan sounds well, though. Also with something off-base with certain sources such as Mark Fischers miserablism.

It's all.. Mild and inoffensive, though, all things considered. Even with the direct action strategy.

Yet the legal battle, I can't really join in that circus.

(This one is on my to-read list, so many on the bucket list.)

Tom scott also did a video in regard to other work

Patricia also did a video in regard to understanding the licensing laws. It's not going to be easy.

Well, imagining other means such as a right to the city and other means of direct action is a anarchist methodology of accomplishing that's also suitable. Also, the handshake deal that is taken for granted. Such as a simplicity on that with a written agreement.

The copyright industry complex. Urgh. Why are so many willing to die on that hill?

Has our licensing laws every been pro-worker? Look at those perverse incentives.

As with the naturalistic reductionists with what happened with religion, so will there be a trend with our own licensing laws. What I also dislike about this reductionism that it reduces all aesthetic energy to how much will commodify it, the get-rich-and-famous contract. Something wiggling inside me is telling my that's not art.

So, to confirm.

LLM and Diffusion models are remixing tech that's mindless and iterative to our designs. Only through the deal that ain't contingent of NDA's and several escrow payments and paperwork, we could do work or anti-work that makes a difference.

Thoughts...

My editorial:

I tend to prioritize fraudulent behaviour than ontological perfection of IP/Copyright. John Lockian property rights are a liberal conception that can lead into petty sport of the printing press. (Even John Locke opposed monopoly, btw)

I don't like either the diffusion model training data and copyright. It's catnip to industrialists because they are about faster and cheaper product.

I'm currently doing more journalism within the legalese stuff, this gets quite

 editorial and even into political and economical matters.
Never underestimate the simple, direct transaction over complex.

Since property rights are easier to argue from an industrialist due to capital, it's only a matter of not playing their game. Only a different game and system that the independent not dependent of the commercial industry.

( Oh and if they decide to content ID this article on Goofy being incredibly hot, they erm I guess I told you so. Guess entertainment ain't an amorphous blob. )
Guess I'll have to preserve it here for great justice.

I guess this is a matter of taking a deep breath. Along with focusing on the main struggle. I guess that's enough of this hornets nest of da industry.

All rights reserved is an outdated licensing term btw. Bears repeating

Thoughts on LLM/Diffusion Normalisation Compilation Ai

Or how I resonate with reallygoodai by Markiplier. Or at least, how this tech merely should remain open-source lest it be corrupted via the copyright industry complex.

Certain comic I'm seeing around, this is my edit, block me if you don't like this. I'll have to defend the right of self-determination against capitalistic entities. It may anger the Anti-ai purists out there. Sorry, gotta portray all my bad ideas sometimes, for better or worse.

Even a idea like that may have to have a truth I'm going to accept, not deny.

Not as bad as the Adobe trying to commodify style to censor everything, though.

 So, apparently, talking points need to addressed again, as I've been getting passionate about discourse, as I try to get out of it, it REELS me right back in! Thanks internet.

(From Flow Tv walking on latex, of soul-searching. )

In faux mercial's don't match the subvertisement of Plug it in by Basment Jaxx, or the fake infomercial by Adult Swim.

Wow, did this predict something or what? That's speculation as this tech develops.

With the in-faux commercials within the demo of Flow Tv, I can see a vigorous editor and visual effects will have to cover it.

It's being introduced into movies such a Dune 2 (blue eyes, I mean, going through Rumor). Yet with every industrial demand for product, the show must go on.

I'm surprised how this fae-like television will be occurring, of course it's Cat-nip for neophiliacs and technologists (good'n bad). Circling all over it like pigs in muck, It's new. As I've gone with Alex and Seth. Some have gone more cautionary, others have embraced like Gabe Newel

With researching all the essays and pundits, I'm going to have to concede, it's better if this stuff is open-source and not in the hands of adobe-Disney, for the increase of learning rights will only lend into more consolidation by monopoly capital.

It's Petit-boug (middle class) to see a Manichean relationship, to submit oneself to a counter-productive content id that It looks like the litigant oneself out of each way, it's trying to own the two-finger Vulcan salute and then making. Does everybody forget the days of all this detectification does? 

With the rise of certain entertainment channels, I'm going to have to accept the fact that neophiliacs are going to eat it up Because it's AI. It will be compounded by the fact that videos are the most expensive art form, with them bound by copyright and licensing laws.

(One of the ai tut sites does star wars IP franchise, I think he likes it with fan art )

Oh, There's a Christian ai video farm, merely going by speculation here with the number and could be wish casting, I think these may lead into other avenues and heavy users/viewers I don't like to think about, stuff that will make this urgh, marketable.

What am I to do with a those who use these tech to make their own livings? I'm not ya dad and my validation will count beyond the reach of this. We live in a society.

Additional to read on the copyright and environment talking points

This is a matter of labour, not the copyright industry complex.

https://blog.giovanh.com/blog/2025/04/03/why-training-ai-cant-be-ip-theft/

On the amphibole of use (or the be pedantic, a Syntactic ambiguity )
https://blog.giovanh.com/blog/2024/11/15/the-ambiguous-use/

Oh, and there's a bonus post on AI environment if you'd like

https://blog.giovanh.com/blog/2024/08/18/is-ai-eating-all-the-energy-part-1-of-2/

Environmental talking points still are the weakest and another.

This 2 hour interview on deep-learning for anybodies who missed it.
These are neural networks, something I've never conceived before.
(Wow, the book is 60 quid long, there's a lot of research with this, along with there being a meta for this of Instagram and all those AI entrepreneurs.)

Another one when a philosopher tackles the ontological question within learning and how it affects others.

Since our questions of intelligence etymological mean to select, it's with the architect paradox with more and less. (That could be a less of a framework with our own worse/better.) I'd only argue the brain ain't like a muscle, merely a stimulation organ. With a stimulus to fatigue ratio not related to tension. Regardless, I'd likely have a good conversation with him.

I wonder how he'll do with Khanmigo and the Khan academy. Not Sam Altman, Maybe Markiplier.

Thoughts...

• Generative AI is a buzzword: It's neural networks and deep learning
  
• So many models now.
• Still think it should be open-source with Aaron Schwartz with the Anti-Fraud. (looked at his documentary, it was moving )
  ( Note, there's a question of it keeping it open source that does not benefit this Ip centralisations/companies, it does open a conundrum, It's going to require the lesson I mention previously. 9:43-13:13)
  
  I'd hold my breath with Capital in conflict, or reconcile with media industry and tech industry. ( Move the needle? Move it for themselves? )
  
• Please conceive of other means of personal ownership and not the private ownership of copyright maximalism, I must ask. 
• This is why I self-publish with all this industry fuff. Grunt work and rote memorisation are being defended.
• All this talk of AI benefits/costs, talk of the bubble popping, has not added much.
• The fact that the copyright alliance attacked a diffusion model because it's Unlicensed is telling.
• "For profit world where slop machine is cheap and human labour is not" Still ricochets in my mind.
  
  
  
  Taking note of this pattern synthesis.

Despite my understanding or misunderstanding, I'll still keep track. Going to check out Moho.

Oh, with all these hours of reading material

Another on the Neural networks and how to understand them, as an auto-complete.

I'll be taking out of bluesky and other sites. No promises to going back to this tension is going to continue.

Conclusion:

Since preconceptions of AI confirmed is such a meta entertainment on microbloggers, I've attempted to adopt an AI ameliorate approach, since attempting to serve it towards IP monopoly landlords cannot be the solution. As with bad actors Hijacking multiple positioning.

Please, I still remain, Ai as open source.

Oh, with this principled distortion with a broad brush and monolith others with scrutiny, as with the reactionary humanist position with Alex Avile, I'll be still keep back as this justifies actions considered extremist, like sending death threats and fantasying about death. Only on micro-bloggers.

Principles, based on a micro-blogherence.

Don't people realise they've already been displaced as freelancers? There has to be an alternative.

See you again, or until I'm assimilated into a borg.

(I've tried to edit this back, that's what happens when you've got no editors)

S***s AI Udemy Review, and other clarifications

(I'll never sketch myself as the nostalgia critic again, and it's not even a coherent expression because it's old stuff, yet.)

Time to describe a bad decision. Following from Seth's Claude Dog Post , I've deliberately postponed this review.

Short version: I've tried my best to not make this an entertainment spectacle by making it into a format video with bells and whistles. Course I took is off-the-mark, and I don't recommend, I then think more about Licence quoting a Cryptography guy and calling it. Due to the illiteracy of licensing, I had to rewrite my TOS.

Longer version

I bought a course by Seth. I'm not convinced with my wabi-sabi tendencies.
I buy it so you don't have to! I'm going through my disagreements and snorting book reviews. Maybe out of parasocial relationship, I've decided to buy his silly course on AI.

Welp, Here are 35 pounds discounted. I could not resist. Most interesting was building a career without AI. Comparing it with the weather and the species like Kevin Kelly. Yet here we go with a another movement I cannot predict.

Then I was recommended of Midjourney and Claude from Seth, and to put it on Youtube, youch. I haven't been into perplexity as it was.

With the ideas here, I'm certain that he's going somewhere here with a workable plan. He had going with something with productivity and value and why others must go and be impresario. A leader and not a follower (ain't that what entrepreneurs do?) Yet, urgh. It's still 85 quid now of this writing.

Axiological arguments of value creation do not apply to a Taylorist Industrialist, by the way, I think he notes that himself, yet that means that with are own urbanism that we are inter-meshed now it's a subject to be explored. That he did within his song of sigificance, 

He then goes into tasks and projects, within how that such a thing will be driven my freelancer cobbler automation and that clients concerned about productivity by the industrialist would as Henry Ford, those are thoughts are another time.

He claims lawyers certain professions aren't gone out of in five years real estate broker, truck driver, a pharmacist, a daycare worker is inconceivably not going to be replaced.

So now I cover with better uses of what techno-domnion and techno-affliation with such a mindless thing, he draws on deterministic free will and Daniel Dennet's Intentional stance. Oh, He also makes a claim that people don't go to Hackneyed Movies from Hollywood any more, I get not courting their opinion. Yet, Disney get's traction.

What can happen with this though is Seth's attraction with determinism as a position compared to Dennet's Compatiblism in regard to interpreting free will when it comes to comparing this tech with autonomy.

I ended up writing the review. (It's going to be licence ramblings from now on. Already done it.

"As a wabisabi illustrator, Independent. The implications of using AI have reached wildfire within anti-ai, I hope copyright cases get turned down because being into creative commons licensing, attempting to out-license it ain't going to work. It's nice to see somebody try to cool the flames down.

It's inevitable that in our times, though, I guess illustrators are either going to embrace or walk the opposite direction.  Impresarios such as us.

I mean, What will happen with disconnection of this day and age. I do hope that there going to be more essays that don't muddy the waters.

Brings me back to Niel Postman's Technopoly, that's such a thing. What the implications with our own designs such as it will pursue the conflicts here. You're thoughts on Henry Ford are poignant.

Thanks."

Got my Certificate, eh, yeah. There's that credentialism that's apparently I have to show now. Ugh, Udemy.

Am I supposed to be proud?

Further notes.

Technopoly out of all the technological books, this felt the most relevant to what's happening today. Even with the last two. This was, despite the disagreement western bias of Cold War terms, eeriey similar to Alex Avile reported on within the second video.

Well, thanks, I guess. I don't think AI-philes will get much, AIphobes will get average with the end with Seth's plan for those who plan to not build their business with it average, cannot fully recommend. He does summarise his ideas in his next post, hmm.

Hmm. Time to revise positions again. Judging from my previous notes.

Considering Steve Klabnick has a similar to mine, with being wary'n technological puritan. Not a Tech opportunist. I'm simply not the industrial bottom line, not Disney, not Nintendo, not King who managed to lay off its employees.

Oh, It's still generative Ai, well that could be a marketing term right now. Now for the last notes.

. Jumping in bed with For-profit companies for content ID is not going to work, a nightmare system as it is. I'd wish they call it copyright infringement, but everything is loaded with RFAA terminology. It is even argued that it ain't the case, the push to make fair use and fair dealings obsolete to apparently control the diffusion models and LLMs. Trying to marketize style will only consolidate power.

Again, licensing tends to encourage monetize/marketerize-or-die kind of logic, which I'm trying to avoid.

. Environment is a loaded gun, none of the essayists or pundits than Alex Avile, fight me on that one. I'd have to limit my micro-blogging after this. Bluesky and Xshwitter aren't going to be deliberately misinformed licensing.

. Education and connections with controlling tech have been noted with Peter Thiel. Along with certain reaction streamers championing it (not all). They should not be taken seriously anyway, anybody who takes thou opportunist ambulance chasers are confirming Neil postman has said about Amusing ourselves to death.

12 minute video, apart from the thing, this is going to move towards a hyperreality. How it is malicious theory to control with aimless categorization and normalisation as the maths cannot be determined by those who preprogram it. I mean Alex Avile has already touched on educational programs who happen to use with the Khan Academy.

This is a question for future generations, and the ones that will come afterwords.

Merely shows how what's at stake here.

Maybe I'm drawing a close parallel to the postmodern villain that Video's Team wrote. Copyright will end with Disney wanting to license our thoughts.

Lets hope for copyright-gate by the sovereign citizen types

(Futurama with that the ad-creep on dreams)

I'm agreement back to Flippo

"Unpopular opinion: the pro-copyright anti-information freedom response to generative AI is reactionary, and it’s bad in all the usual ways reactionary things are bad.
The tech is here to stay. The only thing being decided as a matter of IP law is whether open models will be a thing, or if the big rights holders will get to make a lot of money by licensing proprietary models. As before, I prefer a world where information and tech are free and accessible.
Like, I understand "I don't want to be put out of a job" but I really don't get "I want the tool that puts me out of a job to cost $159.99/mo from Adobe who licenses it from Getty, so I can rest easy knowing it was not trained on anything I made". IP law can deliver the latter, not the former.
Right on cue. Perfectly legal licensed training data. For OpenAI, Midjourney, and Google. Not for open source models folks can hack on and run locally. (If the copyright maximalist doctrine prevails.) All the downside, none of the upside. Yay for copyright!"
He points to this link https://www.404media.co/tumblr-and-wordpress-to-sell-users-data-to-train-ai-tools/

So I pour it, the course and the discourse. I'll leave looking at the AI entertainment channels next time.

Diffusion model ethics to Broad brush

I investigate into the lands of the beep boops.

Previously on Couch Gregor's ai editorals. Since I'm dissatisfied with all the editorials, I made my own.

Looking at the coco workflow, there's the usage of noding and shaders here like it's used within blender, with 3d models.

Huh, according to the questionable lawsuits there n has been ethical questions in regard to this, I've had to check what this will do for independents.

Looks like it will have to relax and into noding, with minimal text-to-prompt speech, I'm afraid such a matter will move towards no copyright infringement. The environmental concerns along with the labour is another matter.

I can still see some inconsistency here and there, i think it will.

The only answer to this will be to do another art piece.

Since copyright licensing laws aren't going to stop this ( Disney has been developing its out diffusion models for to replace to concept artists.. ) Such a matter that copyright infringement it out of existence, it's going move into ethical questions with regard to its use and not contingent on commercial publishing and industry.

Licensing politics! Yeesh. Have they slapped me with a copyright infringement from drawing an Aggron as a pin-up, perish the thought. I'm merely a content producer to them anyhow.

This book is on my audiobook list in terms of essays. So many coming out these days. Got the audiobook.

( Oh hint, my untested estimate is that I agree with 80% percent of the book, it's good at dealing with the transhumanist thought that's been erupting more within Silicon Valley and the saviour complex.)

 With the rise of deepfakes will continue to occur, along with the 

The age of scepticism is going to get more muddy. Herschel Gordon Lewis had a point with direct response rates

Disinformation campaign first, funding latter.

Going to have to boost this as such tech evolves, Fox Key did make a post that this will continue since films are the most labour-intensive and expensive forms that we take for granted. Including videogames, and such a licensing that will only move it underground, along with managing.

I'm not sure if we can out-license of with this will combine to some odd concoctions, I don't like this I.P loving people, (Even though I can imagine a system of resource redistribution not contingent on it, merely like how qualitative differences between a restaurant and a soup kitchen works. Does that make me a anarchist? Oh, well. )

It's not that the lowest common denominator word of content means the worst and the best. Bill Gates definition versus Martha McLuhan definition.

Welp, I'll have to keep track as these things unfold, and soul-searching will occur. This broad brush will see more erm, cases, so to speak. Both Industrialists and the silicon will be watched.

(Also it's copyright infringement, not theft, RFAA implanted that. )

Hbomberguy comment

A big bucket of copyright and it's murky depths.

Of course, I've seen hbomberguys new video. 3:50 hour documentary. The way he covers how the angry video nerd became a content farm, and how the internet historian hidden past and how he built his audience over trolls. Pass on that audience.

This documentary has honest reporting, with my own views of AI. All things considered.

You know, it's important why these content farms and hacks exist in the first place, despite the hollowness. They commodify streams of attention to measurable result for the direct response mass advertiser. These statistics are why they get the email and will continue to do so. Business have to continue, the show must go on and so forth, (as Harlen would say within the Glass teat.) The Flows of traffic that go before us with all the activities going forward.

So it's better to create something with honest, professional practice including the marketing. Those samples within the documentary aren't the case. All these determined streams of attention, all will pass, it's better to build something ourselves.

To quote a direct marketer Herschal Gordon Lewis which the ones who plagiarize ignored:

"Lying isn't necessary If it ever becomes Necessary, Let's all do something else for a living."

Now it's time to review what I've written before.

• Copyright/trademark is always the most fluid law, ostensibly it's meant to protect the specific expression. Yet it's been abused by big business to cripple freelancing/small scale business. It's a paradoxical law where it can't be applied selectively; it's universal. Otherwise, it won't work.

• I could establish further enforcement, yet at the same time that'd give big business a means to cripple. Then that's a no-go. No artificial DMCA takedowns, please! We've seen what happens when the music industry does it for streams. Is Hbomberguy right in this categorization? (Edit: bomberguy did hint at this at the start of plagiarism detection, so points there.)

What's the difference between plagiarism, copyright infringement, and fair use? What does it mean to publish to work in a realm of the internet arena? This question will continue to be asked because it's still open.

Now that, I'll know there'll be natty or not when it comes to my own work.

So the point of this comment, it's likely there are going to be further cases with this battleground.

Appendix:

What I've said about copyright. Seth has covered it within his podcasts, I generally agree. Especially as he's covered the part that's covered with Harlen Elison's rant of paying the writer. I have to quote him, because this blog is a yoink and twist of his format.

Anti-art and anti-business/Questionable cases

 Previously on Couch Gregor's journalistic notes on Gen AI.

Clickbait! Clickbait and Grifts all around like we are in the trenches! It's time to hide and try to make sense of it.

This attempts to clear some of the fog, despite certain talking points being made.
This one is alright, even if it attempts to separate predictive AI for social media and including generative AI. It claims most of predictive AI on social media hit prediction is bunk and that alot of the scams there are where the snake oil is.

Yet it goes into why it uses text to speech long with other certain evolving tech for clarity.

3:10 hour of the most charitable understanding, along with certain questionable cases that are misrepresenting, I'm not acting as a proxy for Alex Avile.

This is the most accurate take, despite the postmodernism (which I don't like. Foucalt, grr ) Now, it does read between the lines on that Case while happening to not simplify something. It's simply not that simple with such cases like that. Oh, some ideas are not contingent on the measurement of currency.

It's becoming more apparent that with our desires, that even with the efficiency argument and the environmental concerns beginning to surface.

These are the ideas that may get me called out for being anti-business or anti-art, simple because I find a case that supports Adobe AI models and Disney's Ai Models, an indefensible inconsistency. It's why I've tried to listen to others, including the sceptics of the anti-ai. Why would you consider yourself a defender of a class with that backing?

Regardless of things, I try not to be too technological determinist about it, there will be capital and another day of work to do.

Do yourself a favour and don't read the comments, even if I did. Merely noting a Marchell Duchamp taking from Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven.

There are multiple sides to this AI debate and conflict, so I'm going to continue my essay archaeology.

Not into the postmodernism, can be ignored yet his copyright alliance ip-loving maximalism which seeks to increase displacement and artist erasure.

I'm not relating to the justifications of it all.

Yet that's not the intention of advertising, it's to repeat like a frequency till your "accountant tells you they're bored with it." Now it's more of hiding heads in the sands, and with the complexities unresolved.

Creative or 'creative' Pundits have been disappointing, to self-defeating cases, and towards to ineffective noise filters that don't work on current models, no glaze or bulls***. 

I'm going to have to leave this for more coherent words, not another quietism and heads in the sand. With the Luddites that have lost, we have to see if we can at least remain technically literate.

"watching artists advocate for stricter copyright law is insane, to me. you are wrong!

these kinds of people hijacked the whole deal. it sucks. its going to turn into "being anti-copyright law is pro-AI and anti-worker" lol"

I don't think these class interests have oversight to be representive, I'd like more critical thinking with our own ideas.

I have to agree with that sentiment, people have got there funds despite archaic laws, even though I know there are lawyers out there that are good people. We have to come to terms of it. I don't think that's it's defeatist, rather than reassessing my terms of assessment.

I may be called anti-art and anti-business, as things have been previously done. Yet, reading between the lines is something I have to do here. I don't want to live in a complete permission culture, there are always going to be conflicts.

If the confusion of permission and remix is still forever, then nothing will be accomplished.

Technically literate, the best kind. Can't wait for part 2 by Alex Avile.

(Post edit Avile proceeded to post ) Slopification has already happened when he pointed at Defen village. )

Here's my Comment.

"Thanks for this, my thoughts... Remember Elsa-Gate? There was already slop within the gaps to quote 'feed the algorithm/market', such a system of romantic individual creativity could be made, yet as such an extent of the sloppers, the masses don't care and YouTube. Almost like being in our own niche places, where the internet was designed without the intention of advertisers, the commodity fetishism of it all, there's still community to build. So is the idea of Neil Postman's amusing ourselves to death when it comes to politics, journalism, education and religion and made to be liked, aaah Dough Ruskoff, within his documentary to be liked. There was already hacknification and hierarchal relationships with the creation of our crafts. I do it myself when it came to it my own sex work. It's like everything is being illuminated, like you said. The fabric of our serviceability being natural in of itself, not so in our systems. 🛋💭"

It's not like I'm defending Elsa gate or that, it's merely how others don't pay attention to their out mechanisations provided with the financial incentives.

Such as it I don't think the Defen Village as the same as such as the other industry complex, we are seeing it more now.

(Oh, I have no intention of debating this maximalist positioning, regardless, supporting Disney/adobe copyright with their AI models is not within their interest, and not within my purview of debate. There is a growing preprosterism. The less the art enterprise looks like the free market enterprise separation from crunch culture and sigma grind sets the better. I guess some)

Let's leave these cases. Permission culture out of the aesthetics of ideas, concepts and style.

Lines in the sand, Generative/Derisive AI

Gurney written about it, Seth Godins, written and podcasted about it and others within my circle are having their takes. With Patrick Willems.

50 min documentary on Ai Along with a several minute read of Colin of the Bloodknife

Hopefully, this is going to be my own point of view. Nothing things from before.

The market, and the way the attention shifts, new trends and technological shifts are occurring.

Image generating search engines, and the need for an endless supply of content, whatever hackneyed to keep the show of going on.

I'll never use any of these images, myself reminded of the handcrafted pottery, and it's wabi-sabi imperfection, it can't be entered within a computer. The artwork and the process ain't there when I typed it up, it's average, middle of the road.

Romantic to the wabi-sabi crumbles back in my days.

I'll be alright, with my professional non-profit stuff, what's the problem is there's going to be others to understanding the grassroots process. Getting in those fingers raw.

It's here now, from chatbots to the like. What there will be in terms of work for free and professional work will change again. Jobs are going to be shuffled. Making sustainability solvency will mean difference once more.

Seeing copyright is going to be reinforced again by small businesses and commercial illustrators. It's a universal law where the copyright trolls will have a field day. Is this what creators should do? Build careers suing others? We don't want big wigs, from Disney, Warner Bros, and Sony making a DMCA AI detection system an over illustrators style, or a writer's voice.

Already, the seeds have been planted by adobe. The enemy of my enemy, ain't my buddy.

An AI detection system that will cut off Artist's living like that audio detection on twitch, youch.

From my the mutuals of my other account.

Not gonna bang on for amateurs for playing with the new tools. Neither am I going to fully publish any AI stuff without giving it the one and only edit, (then, it ain't artificial) It can only summon mass, the general mean. Mediocre. Something that a quirky couch cannot be replicated by. 

Maybe it will interweave with new ideas, in the coming years. Only as a tool to get into the creative juices. Not the other way around. So there has to be an interweaving with it.

Copyright and trademark or one of the most double-edged laws, flexible and hard to be grasped, empowering it won't be good. Fair use will be tested. The content tug between if our ideas will be cannibalized or fair used will occur. Best to work through it, even as the amoral business models change.

Don't get any funny ideas on what they will do with this.