Natanael

joined 1 year ago
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago

Because certainly they don't think brigades harm communities if they won't trust mods to set subreddits as private

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 month ago

"we won't let moderators harm their communities by not letting them eg. protect their communities from brigades and similar harassment"

Sure you thought that through, reddit admins?

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 month ago

Microsoft had a dual screen foldable like that, then stopped supporting it

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Human involvement isn't the rule though. Again, that which ends up in fixed form has to carry expression by a human. Otherwise everything from dirt stains to footprints you accidentally create would be under copyright.

The prompts aren't generally considered enough because there's too little control over the final expression, the same prompt can create wildly different outputs.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The rule is already human expression in fixed form, of creative height. So you have to demonstrate that you the human made notable contributions to the final output.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 month ago

Using stuff like controlnet to manually influence how images are shaped by the ML engine might count, there's some great examples here (involving custom Qr codes)

https://medium.com/@ssmaameri/ai-generated-qr-codes-with-controlnet-huggingface-and-google-colab-a99ffeee2210

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 16 points 1 month ago (21 children)

It's human expression that is protected by copyright. Creative height is the bar.

If you've done nothing but press a button there's often no copyright. Photography involves things like selection of motive, framing, etc. If you just photograph a motive which itself doesn't have copyright, then what you added through your choices is what you may have copyright of. Using another's scan of a public domain book might be considered fair use, for example (not much extra expression added by just scanning)

Independent creation is indeed a thing in copyright law. Multiple people photographing the same sunset won't infringe each other's copyright, at least not if you don't intentionally try to copy another's expression, like actively replicating their framing and edits and more.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 month ago
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 month ago (3 children)

LG had a partial rollable prototype before they stopped making phones

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 71 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Concepts of a plan of an assassination

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 month ago

Casually getting yourself permabanned

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago

And if you don't know who owns it, leaving a note to ask is simple.

I've been the one to leave stuff out that I didn't have space for anymore, with a note on that it's free to take

view more: ‹ prev next ›