1. It's easier to download a new browser than reinstall your OS.
2. Plenty of websites make their own apps, and then you're back to just having every website under the sun trying to verify everyone's age to know who to show explicit content to.
So, for instance, pornography and gambling should be 100% illegal? Or at the least, all social media sites should censor any discussions that aren't child-appropriate?
No, I don't think pornography, or arguably gambling has the same "manipulative addictiveness" hooks in the same way. The equivalent for those would be something like, if a company every time you opened their porn app had your phone emit a silent puff of nicotine (just... imagine that existed for the sake of analogy). It's about the difference between going on to Facebook and seeing your feed of your friends' posts and seeing your feed of posts selected based on content expected to ragebait you into responding.
To be fair, that's a problem with human authors too. Wikipedia is really well-cited, but it's common to check a citation and find it only says half of what a sentence does, while the rest seemingly has no basis in fact. Judges are supposed to actually read the citations to not only confirm the case exists and says what's being claimed, but often to also compare & contrast the situations to ensure that principle is applicable to the case at hand.
Yup. The issue with LLMs are not that any specific thing it is doing is unique. Rather that it does it in previously unimaginable volume, scale, and accessibility.
It depends on how. The Fourth Amendment prohibits warrantless searches, not any information itself. The police can always just have an officer tail you 24/7, and it's perfectly legal. Placing a GPS tracker on your car physically invades your property and therefore counts as a search though. Generally any public photography is not a search, so they're free to record and keep records however they legally can.
Though at some point, even SCOTUS just does whatever feels right, regardless of what the law says. In Carpenter, SCOTUS ruled 5-4 that your cellular company voluntarily handing over historical cell data also counts as a government search. An appellate court has held that if photography is extensive enough, it becomes a search. SCOTUS has held before that uncommon photographic equipment can constitute a search. That logic honestly doesn't really make sense, but it is what it is now. I wouldn't be surprised that the courts rule against it, but that's not what the law really says.
Has there ever been any documented circumstance where significant inside information became public and known thanks to a trade? Most often, the trade is made at the last minute, and the information gets subsequently revealed anyway. And it's impossible to tell whether somebody is an inside trader, a wealthy gambling addict making a stupid decision, or hypothetically a foreign agent pretending to be an inside trader to make people believe in a particular outcome.
It's impossible to know anything for certain; almost everything is probabilistic.
Also I'm not sure how to interpret your criteria because timing matters, I don't think saying 'it gets revealed in the end' is very meaningful.
Anyway, on Polymarket specifically, sure, military strikes are a common one. Seems like a useful signal to go hide in the basement. Outside Polymarket, there were insider trades in 2008 that I'm sure were useful.
I'm not sure being beholden to the whims of the Chinese Communist Party is an iota better than the whims of proprietary megacorps, especially given this probably will become part of a megacorp anyway.
It seems you missed the point entirely once you saw the word "Chinese". The point isn't that the models are from China. It's that the weights are open. You can download the weights and finetune them yourself. Nobody is beholden to anything.
2. Plenty of websites make their own apps, and then you're back to just having every website under the sun trying to verify everyone's age to know who to show explicit content to.
reply