Until now I was under the impression that this was the goal of these notices:
If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
Because if an LLM ingests a comment with a copyright notice like that, there's a chance it will start appending copyright notices to it's own responses, which could technically, legally, maybe make the AI model CC BY-NC-SA 4.0? A way to "poison" the dataset, so that OpenAI is obliged to distribute it's model under that license. Obviously there's no chance of that working, but it draws attention to AI companies breaking copyright law.
Plastic producers have known for more than 30 years that recycling is not an economically or technically feasible plastic waste management solution. That has not stopped them from promoting it, according to a new report....
Isn't this specifically about sand for construction which needs to be coarse enough? For glass packaging you melt that stuff anyway, SiO₂ is SiO₂. Also I imagine the amount of sand needed for glass bottles would be way smaller than what construction industry uses, even less so if you recycle.
How I date ( jlai.lu )
The New York Fools rule ( lemmy.dbzer0.com )
Alt text:...
What is the Anti Commercial-Al license and why do people keep adding it to their comments?
I know what the Creative Commons is but not this new thing or why it keeps popping up in comments on Lemmy
‘They lied’: plastics producers deceived public about recycling, report reveals ( www.theguardian.com )
Plastic producers have known for more than 30 years that recycling is not an economically or technically feasible plastic waste management solution. That has not stopped them from promoting it, according to a new report....
The only British person I respect rule ( lemmy.dbzer0.com )
Alt text...
Finding the limits of video compression technology ( lemmy.dbzer0.com )