Sandbar_Trekker

Granular privacy controls for profile sharing

That said, there is one noticeable new feature for users: easier profile sharing. This feature allows users to share their name and image from existing profiles such as their Google, Apple or operator accounts in a conversation, ensuring that parties in a conversation become easier to identify, particularly in group settings. In keeping with RCS’s focus on ensuring their privacy, users will be able to control who can receive that information.

Looks like iOS devices just recently started supporting E2EE between android and iOS (as long as iOS users have updated to iOS 26.5 and android users are on the latest version of Google Messages).

I’m hoping this means that we’ll start to see other messaging clients supporting RCS besides Google Messages.

You’re cutting out the important context with that quote:

Occasionally I’ll have it write more substantial code for me, usually for bug fixes, and occasionally for small features. I find it does a pretty decent job here, but I keep it on manual mode and often ask it to write the code in a different way, or take a different approach.

That doesn’t sound like someone who’s just blindly copying and pasting whatever an LLM told them to do. I agree there’s absolutely a risk with using LLM generated code that could cause some copyright issues. But the way he’s using it sounds like it minimizes that risk.

The Licensing Problem It doesn’t sound like the way the dev is using the LLM would make this a high risk issue. He’s mostly using it for testing/brainstorming/pseudo code rather than generating code to use directly.

The title of this post is incredibly misleading and I can tell you didn’t read how it’s actually being used. The dev mostly isn’t using the LLM for code generation. There wouldn’t be any “potentially unattributed plagiarism landmines” to worry about.

Edit: The dev does use the code in some cases, see below.

I think you meant LLM tools?
If you’re meaning all AI tools then that also includes anything ML related. Accessibility tools such as Speech to Text models, Text to Speech models. Research tools such as those used to virtually unravel and read heavily damaged or incredibly fragile ancient scrolls, tools to help detect exoplanets, or tools for discovering cures to diseases. And more.

By taking on the meme generator, Saflor may hit a wall if the court finds that his arguments apply to any meme generator and a finding in his favor could risk undercutting the entire meme ecosystem, Goldman said.

This will definitely be an interesting case to watch unfold. In my opinion it could definitely be a win if websites that run any kind of meme generator are forced to pay the official artist to have their template on their site.

This doesn’t really seem fitting to this sub, but I guess this is tech related news because they have multiple websites?

In most countries, the output of a single prompt will not be copyrightable. However, once someone starts arranging the output into something more, then copyright can be applied.

Overall, it depends on the country, but in some they are asking their legislators for clarification. Many are trying to apply pre-existing copyright laws to LLMs.

The U.S. Copyright Office wrote up a report about this and included a list of how other countries are handling it.
https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf

Certainly looks interesting, but I have to mention that I’m not a fan of the Discord Rich Presence feature. The directory access that this typically requires immediately bumps up any flatpak to a medium risk category.

Granted I’m definitely one of those users that does not care to share my current status to all other users as to what I’m watching/listening to at every moment.

That article completely practically skips over the section in the report that says that copyright can be applied by compilation to an overall work. See section II - F: “Modifying or Arranging AI-Generated Content”

Or you can also just skip to the conclusion of the actual report itself:

As described above, in many circumstances these outputs will be copyrightable in whole or in part—where AI is used as a tool, and where a human has been able to determine the expressive elements they contain. Prompts alone, however, at this stage are unlikely to satisfy those requirements.
https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf

Edit: The article you linked does mention that the works can be copyrighted as a whole, but it does not mention this in the conclusion.

According to the U.S. Copyright Office, it absolutely can, but it depends on how much control the user exerts on the final product.

If a single prompt was used and they copy pasted the entire thing, then yes, as you have said, it is not copyrightable.

However, if multiple prompts were used and the end result is compiled/arranged with enough direction by the end user, then it can be copyrighted by compilation.

Generating content with AI is often an initial or intermediate step, and human authorship may be added in the final product. As explained in the AI Registration Guidance, “a human may select or arrange AI-generated material in a sufficiently creative way that ‘the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.’”¹²⁶ A human may also “modify material originally generated by AI technology to such a degree that the modifications meet the standard for copyright protection.”¹²⁷

As several commenters noted, human authors should be able to claim copyright if they select, coordinate, and arrange AI-generated material in a creative way.¹²⁸ This would provide protection for the output as a whole (although not the AI-generated material alone).¹²⁹ A relatively common scenario in registration applications is the combination of human-authored text with AI-generated images. In one early case, for instance, the Office found that the selection and arrangement of AI-generated images with human-authored text in a comic book were protectable as a compilation.

https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf

You really should know by now how scrutinous people are about AI anything.

Well, we are on the Fediverse here where there’s a very loud echo chamber of anti-AI sentiment. Outside of this bubble, there’s a loud minority that’s anti-AI, but the vast majority of end users are more neutral on the subject.

For any AI Translations, it’s good practice to open up a different chat with the model, and have it translate the output back to your original language so that you can double check what is being said.

A copay is the amount that you pay for certain healthcare expenses. The rest is paid for by your insurance company.

knowingly, intentionally continue to fund neo-Nazis in Sweden.

Am I understanding you correctly that you’re accusing anyone who continues to use Mullvad as someone who supports neo-Nazis in Sweden?

I’m wondering if there’s some grace period for projects to migrate, or if they just start locking projects down immediately after their community votes to ban something.

It’s a little hard to argue that when the top of the site now says, “Cryptocurrency projects are no longer allowed. View change”.

A lot of users here seem to be under the misconception that these are 100% AI generated images.

The problem isn’t really with that as the article states that this is an issue with using AI in the editing process:

Outright hoaxes remain rare and are often easy to spot, said Lees – nobody is falling for a toucan sighting in Siberia – but he says birders often use AI to edit and improve an image, and the algorithm can then introduce parts from different bird species to create the new image.

It’s also worth noting that some phones allow you to zoom in beyond your camera’s normal capabilities by using AI to enhance the picture. With some algorithms this might not be an issue, but if it’s using a model that’s been trained by some animal/object database then this can introduce innaccuracies that would cause problems for researchers trying to keep their database clean.

It works at full resolution, but it’s a cat and mouse game. If something like this becomes popular, then all that needs to be done is to start passing images through a filter first (blur, lower resolution, etc.), or just train a new vision model that can pick out both the blurred message as well as the decoy message.