(Yes, I tried to force the colours using userContent.css.
Uncategorized
2
Posts
1
Posters
4
Views
-
(Yes, I tried to force the colours using userContent.css. It ignored it).
-
(Yes, I tried to force the colours using userContent.css. It ignored it).
Going back to an older version fixed the problem immediately.
But it's not a sustainable fix.[And it's not a matter of getting used to the new settings: I'm photophobic and these new settings which appear to be impossible to fix, cause me literal pain]
-
undefined oblomov@sociale.network shared this topic on
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@res260 Sadly a likely observation :\
So many people just giving up on their craft.
-
@cwebber things sure are changing fast. code quality for example. and the ability of developers to write or recognize good code. now the direction of change isn't great, but...
-
@cwebber I'm hanging out there a lot and yes there is a lot of vibecoding. However, they don't seem to vibecode more than the average paid software dev.
In 2024, I'd say about 20% of my friends vibecoded. Today the number looks more like 90%. This is not specific to atproto, my understanding is that most people vibecode nowadays.
-
(Reposted as unlisted to not pollute my instance's discovery with slop-related content)
The US Supreme Court has declined to hear the AI copyright case. So, the new Copyright Office guidance that says the output of prompting systems that produce art, sound, text, etc., cannot be copyrighted, no matter how many times the human re-prompts or iterates the system, is upheld: https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright
(Guidance from Copyright Office: https://copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf )
So, unless I'm misunderstanding something…
1) If your corporate codebase is written with AI, and it leaks to the public, too bad -- no copyright protections. People can take it and use it.
2) AI generated code is incompatible with GPL and GPL-like projects, because GPL requires copyright to be assigned in order to enforce the license. (Edit: only a problem if the project is 100% AI, since public domain can be mixed into GPL without problem.)
Is that really what's happening? Am I misunderstanding something here?
-
Trump si conferma come il Presidente che ha ucciso più statunitensi in patria e all’estero.
From: @peacelink
https://sociale.network/@peacelink/116165350333099284
-
@cwebber @ryanrandall Nah, definitely a different Why - you can find the Ruby Why's real name and the Bluesky Why's name also appears from time to time and it's not the same name
-
@pjohanneson @cwebber yeah ;)
-
@cancel I wonder how this applies (if at all) to procgen art and other non-destructive digital art workflows in general
