Misleading title? "Reddit claimed..", no, others claimed, reddit has not commented

Are you saying the writers of these programs have read all these books, and were inspired by them so much they wrote millions of books? And all this software is doing is outputting the result of someone being inspired by other books?

For a lot of normal people linux just doesnt offer any advantages they care about. If you tell them it can do everything windows can do, the question "so why should i go through the effort of switching" remains. There'd have to be something they really want, that they can't get from windows.
Though average users use mobile devices instead of desktops more and more, so I can see windows becoming mostly a thing that people use at work.

Wanting to knock those bikes down doesn't mean someone hates bikes. I strongly dislike cars, and have driven bikes my entire life (cause, netherlands), and if I walked past these bikes I'd also feel a slight temptation to kick them down (no, I wouldn't actually do it).

You claim it's a small problem, but would you feel that way if a car parked half way on the sidewalk? It's not a small problem for someone in a wheelchair. They already face enough obstacles, and people who do this aren't helping.

Bikes being great and cars being horrible doesn't change that someone here was being inconsiderate with their bike.

Maybe it isnt in an english speaking country, and makes sense in another language?

The difference is that european citizens shouldn't be required to deal with profit driven companies (banks) to have access to legal currency.

1. Hover effects, you often want to respond to the user hoving their mouse somewhere, for instance showing a tooltip.
2. Battery/network saving, a site can pause animations or reduce update requests when the window is inactive.
3. I cant really think of a good use for this one these days, it was something browsers had in the 90s (not just readonly, websites could move your browser window where they wanted for a while). Maybe its kept for backwards compatibility.

Unless you think theres no difference between killing a person and closing a program, I think we can agree they should be treated differently in the eyes of the law.

And so theres a difference between a person reading a book and being inspired by it, and someone writing a program that automatically transforms the book in data that can create new books.

I think it is supposed to be untracable in the same way cash is. It's even supposed to be usable offline.
Whether or not they will accomplish this is yet to be seen.

Say I see a book that sells well. It's in a language I don't understand, but I use a thesaurus to replace lots of words with synonyms. I switch some sentences around, and maybe even mix pages from similar books into it. I then go and sell this book (still not knowing what the book actually says).

I would call that copyright infringement. The original book didn't inspire me, it didn't teach me anything, and I didn't add any of my own knowledge into it. I didn't produce any original work, I simply mixed a bunch of things I don't understand.

That's what these language models do.

map of land usage in the netherlands

See those red dots? Thats where people live. See the vast vast light green background? Thats agrictulture.

The biggest contributor is the massive amounts of land being used for producing meat, which is then exported to other countries

Nothing gets merged, theyre completely separate, in the same way [email protected] and [email protected] are different email addresses.

some.lemmy/c/music is the music community on some.lemmy, if you want to see the music community on another.lemmy while you are at some.lemmy, you go to some.lemmy/c/[email protected]

It's generally not the creator who gets the money.

Not a lawyer, but you can argue that if the language model is trained using gpl licensed data, then the language model has to be published under gpl as well.

What they mean is, they're worried about bad press

A human can, within limits.

But software isn't human. AI models aren't "learning", "practicing" and "developing their own skills".

Human-made software is copying other peoples work, transforming it, letting a bunch of calculations loose on it, and mass producing similar works as the input.

Using an artists work to train an ai model and making similar stuff with it to make money off of it, is like copying someones work, putting on a mug, and selling that.
It's not using it as inspiration to improve your own skills.

How would a decentralized search engine work? What aspect is decentralized? I'm curious how that'd work

I'm not sure. And I'm not sure there's legal precedant for that either.
That's why I dont have a problem with any of these lawsuits, it gives us clarity on the legal aspects, whichever way it goes.

If you release code under gpl, and I modify it, I'm required to release those modifications publicly under gpl as well.