I'm not taking them at their word, sorry. Genuinely, there is no reason to.
What legal issues?
lol you can't copyright mathematics
Yeah, and suckers are born every day...
> but I can believe it to be accidental What accident is it when the system is designed to function that way?
What a weird conclusion to come to looking at the world around you
Yeah, they didn't choose the line of attack, the person they copied it from did..
>and their own statement saying "While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models ." Legally safe? Forensic level guarantee? Since when do…
They do look pretty stupid right now, actually.
It's one of those questions that sets the bar so low, the conversation might as well not be taking place
> do people really think OpenAI is snooping at people specifically? I'd be shocked if they weren't
What does it matter? We're supposed to not call it plagiarism anymore because it's inconvenient to call it the plagiarism machine? What's your actual argument? Otherwise it's completely irrelevant what an LLM does in…
>I refuted all these accusations but he replied “there is nothing you can do, I simply do not trust you”. I was confused why one would turn an incredible source for celebration (of their achievements!) into such…
They are already claimed to be liars
I don't think the poster was crying for those leaders
Still waiting for anyone to point to any good done by prediction markets
The third circuit's opinion is poorly reasoned and its not binding precedent in California anyway, which can now regulate Kalshi because the ninth circuit's decision is binding precedent in California. Congress does not…
Yeah but they markets don't equilibrate. Again, the 2022 election pool just reflected the thought of a big whale.
They are partisan. It's just whoever decides to make the bets. Like the 2022 election situation was just one big whale. There's just nothing about it that makes it inherently non-partisan.
Nothing needs to be done, Kalshi has no loophole. The Ninth Circuit ruled on exactly this last week.
>the rationalist community seems to have had a longstanding interest in the idea Easiest way to know its just valueless
> competent DOJ Answered your own question.
This website has been full of people that say it's better than journalism, so I don't think you're really capturing the entirety of the dynamic
Yeah, and? Being a parent doesn't entitle someone to do anything they want
You're projecting.
I'm not taking them at their word, sorry. Genuinely, there is no reason to.
What legal issues?
lol you can't copyright mathematics
Yeah, and suckers are born every day...
> but I can believe it to be accidental What accident is it when the system is designed to function that way?
What a weird conclusion to come to looking at the world around you
Yeah, they didn't choose the line of attack, the person they copied it from did..
>and their own statement saying "While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models ." Legally safe? Forensic level guarantee? Since when do…
They do look pretty stupid right now, actually.
It's one of those questions that sets the bar so low, the conversation might as well not be taking place
> do people really think OpenAI is snooping at people specifically? I'd be shocked if they weren't
What does it matter? We're supposed to not call it plagiarism anymore because it's inconvenient to call it the plagiarism machine? What's your actual argument? Otherwise it's completely irrelevant what an LLM does in…
>I refuted all these accusations but he replied “there is nothing you can do, I simply do not trust you”. I was confused why one would turn an incredible source for celebration (of their achievements!) into such…
They are already claimed to be liars
I don't think the poster was crying for those leaders
Still waiting for anyone to point to any good done by prediction markets
The third circuit's opinion is poorly reasoned and its not binding precedent in California anyway, which can now regulate Kalshi because the ninth circuit's decision is binding precedent in California. Congress does not…
Yeah but they markets don't equilibrate. Again, the 2022 election pool just reflected the thought of a big whale.
They are partisan. It's just whoever decides to make the bets. Like the 2022 election situation was just one big whale. There's just nothing about it that makes it inherently non-partisan.
Nothing needs to be done, Kalshi has no loophole. The Ninth Circuit ruled on exactly this last week.
>the rationalist community seems to have had a longstanding interest in the idea Easiest way to know its just valueless
> competent DOJ Answered your own question.
This website has been full of people that say it's better than journalism, so I don't think you're really capturing the entirety of the dynamic
Yeah, and? Being a parent doesn't entitle someone to do anything they want
You're projecting.