It doesn’t actually contribute to the discussion.

That’s not a meaningful comparison because it splits Ubuntu by version but all of Arch is a single category. We’d need to roll up the Ubuntu users for it to be apples to apples.

Someone is going back over their contributions, right?

Right?

Debian and Fedora have ports, though not all packages are available, and you’ll probably be doing a lot of porting if you want anything else.

But this bit from the uConsole R-01 product page might be relevant to you:

uConsole R-01 is a highly experimental model and requires some experience with Linux systems & FOSS. We strongly recommend all beginners choose other models.

swapoff, reformat, swapon?

Also make sure the drive isn’t dying.

Even at big companies, devs get flexibility because they need to run a bunch of random stuff that can look sketchy to security software.

Long story short, I can’t use multiple monitor RDP because I have different resolution monitors and they are stacked 2x2 instead of all in a row.

Did you try setting them up as one big display across all four, instead of four little ones? I think that’s something you can do.

Does the multi-mon RDP thing work from a Windows client too? I’d be surprised if it did, Windows’ multi-monitor support is fairly lacking in my experience too.

Why not run sed and pipe to diff to preview changes?

You’d still have to manually copy out the command line to a notes file, but I don’t think that that’s too terrible. You could use a terminal-integrated snippets palette to make it a little smoother.

I’m not aware of any program that does exactly everything you want it to, so you might write your own or extend an existing one, as mentioned.

You would probably get a better answer by asking a Rhino community. But a quick look at the documentation suggests you can choose: https://rhinolinux.org/wiki-rpk.html

⻚⍿⯽⎻⾘⾄♎ⲱ⬆⒍Ⲑ

I hope all your stuff supports Unicode.

I don’t have an answer for you, I just want to tell you that the plural of schema is schemata.

There is already some debate about what time of year the birth actually happened. Most people agree that regardless of the actual day, it probably wasn’t Dec 25 (or the equivalent if using other calendars). That’s just the one that people agreed to use.

Not exactly. Most Christian holidays are redefined existing holidays. Christmas was “oh everyone already celebrates a feast around midwinter, let’s make it a celebration of the birth of Jesus so we can still do the celebration but in a Christian way”.

Right, but it’s not a pure list of facts. When you set it to paper, it’s unique, and you could argue it’s art. In fact, a quick Google search found one such example: https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting-Shopping-list-1/2146403/10186433/view

Granted, that one was presumably intended to be a work of art on creation and your weekly shopping list isn’t, but the intent during creation isn’t all that important for US copyright law. You create it, you get the rights.

I’m not aware of any federal case law on copyright and AI. Happy to read some if you have a suggestion.

copyright only protects them from people republishing their content

This is not correct. Copyright protects reproduction, derivation, distribution, performance, and display of a work.

People also ingest their content and can make derivative works without problem. OpenAI are just doing the same, but at a level of ability that could be disruptive to some companies.

Yes, you can legally make derivative works, but without license, it has to be fair use. In this case, where not only did they use one whole work in its entirety, they likely scraped thousands of whole NYT articles.

This isn’t even really very harmful to the NYT, since the historical material used doesn’t even conflict with their primary purpose of producing new news.

This isn’t necessarily correct either. I assume they sell access to their archives, for research or whatever. Being able to retrieve articles verbatim through chatgpt does harm their business.

That is not correct. Copyright subsists in all original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102

Legally, when you write your shopping list, you instantly have the rights to that work, no publication or registration necessary. You can choose to publish it later, or not at all, but you still own the rights. Someone can’t break into your house, look at your unpublished works, copy them, and publish them like they’re their originals.

There are issues other than publishing, but that’s the biggest one. But they are not acting merely as a conduit for the work, they are ingesting it and deriving new work from it. The use of the copyrighted work is integral to their product, which makes it a big deal.

True. I fully expect that the court will rule against OpenAI here, because it very obviously does not meet any fair use exemption.

Generally you’re correct, but copyright law does concern itself with learning. Fair use exemptions require consideration of the purpose character of use, explicitly mentioning nonprofit educational purposes. It also mentions the effect on the potential market for the original work. (There are other factors required but they’re less relevant here.)

So yeah, tracing a comic book to learn drawing is totally fine, as long as that’s what you’re doing it for. Tracing a comic to reproduce and sell is totally not fine, and that’s basically what OpenAI is doing here: slurping up whole works to improve their saleable product, which can generate new works to compete with the originals.