woelkchen

FYI: You can get the first game for free at Fanatical by subscribing to their newsletter. https://www.fanatical.com/en/game/intravenous (2 days left)

The context is not the same.

It's not the same but it's similar enough when, as the article states, it is solely about short summaries. The article may be wrong, Google may be outright lying, maybe, maybe, maybe.

Google, as by far the web's largest ad provider, has a business incentive to direct users towards the web sites, so the website operators have to pay Google money. Maybe I'm missing something but I just don't see the business sense in Google not doing that and so far I don't see anything approximating convincing arguments.

Yes. How do you think the Gemini model understands language in the first place?

Licensed and public domain content, of which there is plenty, maybe even content specifically created by Google to train the data. "the Gemini model understands language" in itself hardly is proof of any wrongdoing. I don't claim to have perfect knowledge or memory, so it's certainly possible that I missed more specific evidence but "the Gemini model understands language" by itself definitively is not.

Would you mind sending that email to the millions of devs around the world?

Yes, I mind. For Qt5 applications, basic HiDPI support can be patched in with a single line. I actually did that for a handful of applications, tested them, and then submitted pull requests on Github. I cannot program, so all I could do is to copy and paste that one line from the Qt documentation. It's not much but I already did my part.

that latter will be the case rather sooner than later I’m afraid. It’s just a matter of time with Google.

If that will actually be the case and passes legal challenges, basically all copyright can be abolished which would definitively have some upsides but also downsides. All those video game ROM decompilation projects would be suddenly in the clear, as those are new source code computer-generated from copyrighted binary code, so not really different from a AI generated image based on a copyrighted image used as training data. We could also ask Gemini write a full-length retelling of Harry Potter and just search, replace all trademarked names, and sell that shit. Evil companies could train an AI on GNU/Linux source codes and tell it to write an operating system. Clearly derived work from GPL code but without any copyright to speak of, all that generated code could be legally closed. I don't like that.

No one will click on the source, which means the only visitor to your site is Googlebot.

That was the argument with the text snippets from news sources. Publishers successfully lobbied for laws to be passed in many countries that required search engine operators to pay fees. It backfired when Google removed the snippets from news sources that demanded fees from Google. Their visitors dropped by a massive amount, 90% or so, because those results were less attractive to Google users to click on than the nicer results with a snippet and a thumbnail. So "No one will click on the source" has already been disproven 10 or so years ago when the snippet issue was current. All those publishers have entered a free of charge licensing agreement with Google and the laws are still in place. So Google is fine, upstart search engines are not because those cannot pressure the publishers into free deals.

This has already happened and continues to happen.

With Gemini?

I am once again begging Framework to just give us a damn regular DPI display that works!

Bottom Skinner is right, though. It's 2024. HiDPI has to be supported by all toolkits, desktops, and applications at this point. There are no excuses. Even 1080p on a 14" laptop screen warrants 125% scaling, IMO.

As I understand it, this is only about using search results for summaries. If it's just that and links to the source, I think it's OK. What would be absolutely unacceptable is to use the web in general as training data for text and image generation (=write me a story about topic XY).

aber da geht halt das restliche MD nicht.

Richtig, aber haste ja auch nichts von genutzt, von daher...

Rotlicht-Blitzer habe ich in der Gegend einige gesehen. Obwohl ich nichts eingestellt habe, ist mein Auto auch der Meinung in NL ständig piepsen zu müssen. Habe erst später gerafft, dass es sich dabei um Blitzer-Warnung handelt (ist wohl nicht verboten da und benutze auch nicht einmal das Navi des Autos). Bis auf die eine Streckenkontrolle waren alles Rotlicht-Blitzer und die haben nun mal die Eigenschaft eben nicht auf Autobahnen zu sein.

Dann ist das großflächig woanders. War besonders in letzter Zeit öfter in Limburg, Nordholland und Südholland und da hatte ich genau einen bei Den Haag.

Ist das so? Ist teste mal von meinem:

Test: Test
      + Test

Mir scheint, du kennst unabhängig vom Eingabegerät Markdown-Formatierung einfach nicht.

In NL gibt es auf Autobahnen fast keine Blitzer. Generell kann ich mich nur an Rotlichtblitzer und ein Streckenradar bei Den Haag erinnern. Da wird in gefährlichen Situationen gerast, auf der Mittelspur getrödelt und rechts überholt. Da sind mir deutsche Autobahnen lieber, wo sich in überwiegend daran gehalten wird, dass man rechts entspannt fährt und verringertes Tempo und Blitzer in Gefahrensituationen aufgestellt sind.