Hey look a lot of people read the President's tweets

Offset deep v's that showcase one breast

But, did Wayne Brady have to slap a bitch?

Love a collab

Don't sleep on boys who can do computer, bro. Don't ever do it. And in many cases, gals. Gals are getting on the computer too because they love shopping on there, and also quantum. Also sharing secrets with their friends. For these and many reasons, gals do computer too. What was the question?

To begin: Ensure that you behave in a manner worthy of the flag. For example, do not construct a concentration camp surrounded by alligators for the extralegal detention of people based in some large part on their race or nationality.

I think the recent surge of interest in nuclear energy is great... but it bums me out (in a 'perhaps-we'll-die kind of way) that this silicon valley beta tester bullshit is anywhere near nuclear construction.

The technology isn't the threat. Shit corporate governance is.

All of a sudden HALF of all butt cheeks? Just willy nilly?

And the liability? A chatbot starts doing its best impersonation of Son of Sam's dog for a lonely kid in Pennsylvania, are we going to say categorically it was something about the way that kid used the machine that made it do that? Does the company running the thing bear responsibility?

I think it's fascinating that there's these two legal hurdles ai (broadly) is trying to navigate that, imo, seem to maybe conflict with each other.

And im really curious about the liability/responsibility question.

And it all helps define what this generation defining 'thing' is.

I'd have to Google that assemblage re: copyright, but I didn't make that argument up, that's a position being advanced.

To be clear (and just for laughs), your position is that when Gemini tells me the names of those cases (that I do not currently know), I am in effect telling myself?

Not necessarily, imagine youre prepared to defend speech rights regardless of speaker (as you should), but you are saying something like a (thoughtful, professional, elegant) version of the second half of what I said re: machine speech (dunno if you bring the printing press in or not).

Those are paraquotes and thats my paraphrasing of the ai community arguing out of both sides of its mouth.

Less acerbically, I am curious if you see the copyright argument and speech argument as being in tension, and how you square the liability question.

'ai is like a person reading and learning in a library when it is violating copyright, but is a rote tool for the distribution of speech when it comes time to take responsibility for what it says.'

Not sure why 'owner' gets the '(?)' among those 3. That's who I would imagine assuming liability first, as they're the only really singular entity with something like control over the machine. A programmer or user would have to go rogue imo.

I'll accept the premise, but who is responsible or liable for it if it defames or threatens someone.

Huac tua... an unfortunate banger.

Give us that Supreme Jury. I would also take another legislative chamber selected at random.