I'm surprised at how few comments there are about just how creepy this is. Going to a university is not implied consent for random people to throw up searchable websites with your name and face, let alone allowing random, anonymous other people to attach anything they want to it in a comment section.
I get it he was copying The Social Network, but just because it's been done before doesn't make it better now.
AI music is generally not going to be copyrightable unless they can show genuine human creativity was involved. So if a song is 100% AI, you could just go around performing it or straight up selling copies yourself and there's nothing* they could do about it. Though I do wonder if a human writes the lyrics, but AI generates all the music parts, if it becomes sufficiently human for copyright. Because the lyrics at that point would be actual creativity.
* I am not a lawyer, and this won't stop them from possibly trying to sue you or even winning depending on the situation. Or trying to prove there is human ingenuity involved. Do at your own peril.
I highly recommend using the "Not interested" button on anything you don't want to see. It's actually pretty effective at pruning unwanted things from your recommendations. If I get anything political or slop related, it gets the not interested button.
I also have a second channel for language learning where I used it to prune out any videos in English. It's not perfect and recommends a few still, but they get more rare as time passes.
This was something Louis Rossman suggested at one point. Small claims courts don't typically allow lawyers and require a direct representative. And small claims courts are fairly cheap financially and judicially to file in.
I wager such an attack would be very costly since they'd likely be ordered to pay the court cost of around $100 per case if they left it to default. But if they didn't, they now need to take an employee from somewhere to represent them instead of doing their actual job, which is also costly. So getting even 100 people to do this simultaneously could cost upwards of $10,000 to the target company.
A tale older than the use of GLP-1. People do X to lose weight, they hit a target weight, declare victory and continue the habits that got them in trouble in the first place. You can go a little bit heavier on the meals and loosen the exercise if you desire, but you still have to keep yourself within maintenance threshold or the weight comes back.
GLP-1 masks the problem and people don't realize their actions aren't ideal once the mask is removed.
> Combined with cryptographic signatures for humans
What happens when the human gives an agent access to said signature? Then you fall back on traditional anti-bot techniques and you're right back where you started.
Because they pay API costs to send the search to SerpApi. I forget exactly what the cost was for them per-search and I'm having little luck finding it, but I know they've published that cost before and I know it's more than a whole cent. By comparison, running a good but not top-tier model to answer the same question might run a small fraction of a cent. Cheaper than a follow up query by the user.
> Similar monoculture of global thought is happening in all fields.
Thereby removing yet more interesting things to see in the world through the spread of hyper-optimized inoffensive blandness. In the same way that restaurants are slowly turning into the same set of grey boxes with little of note distinguishing each.
Yup, see how long it lasts when companies in California can't install anything on their servers because they get Rejected for Legal Reasons responses to their package requests.
Because the "store" never confirmed that Cloudflare is 18.
I get it he was copying The Social Network, but just because it's been done before doesn't make it better now.
reply