By using the definition of the word or asking people for their opinion

There are people that have a name that looks random, but has a meaning

There is a free trial and there was 1 month for free 2 months ago. You can try it and see if you think its worth the price

I tried it and i personally believe its not worth the price, but testing it is better than just refusing the concept from the start

My instance hides most political communities unless you are subscribed to them so people saying that Russia and China are amazing is not a problem; i see people complaining about lemmy.ml way more

I woudnt call a software where its hard to rotate an image “perfect”

Lemmy is going to end capitalist exploitation of social media, just like email did for sending messages

/s
If lemmy users are willing to use clients with ads, a normal person would too

My experience with people on Reddit was better than the one with people on Lemmy, but i am probably an exception considering the amount of people saying Lemmy is much better than Reddit

By analyzing, isnt it awarding points based on how well you can replicate it and redoing it in an attempt to obtain more points?

By stealing, i meant rewriting it, following the same points but using unique words. Is that illegal or are you referring to completely copying the text?

If a larger youtuber steals the script and content of a video from a smaller youtuber, as far as i know, it wouldnt be illegal. It would hurt the smaller youtuber and benefit the larger one. It would make people mad if they found out about it, but there wouldnt be people who propose changing copyright law to include ideas

I am using youtubers as the example because this happened and a lot of people got angry and its similar to the AI situation
People can complain that something unethical is legal without proposing new copyright laws without flaws

I still fear that mistakes may slip through, but those can be spotted if multiple people check the text

There are wikipedia pages that are really obscure(especially from pages that are not in english) and that nobody would probably check to verify its correct

Generative AI suffers from inaccuracy; text AI generators making up believable lies if it doesnt have enough information

But AI can be inaccurate, which is a problem when trying to teach people things

Isnt this better than meta being entirely responsible for fact checking?

!lemmysilver

Lemmy is filled with too much hate, hopefully things can change

Politics: the activities of the government, members of law-making organizations, or people who try to influence the way a country is governed

All the comments against the decision i have seen on this post argue why the rule should be bypassed, not why this respects the rule

a very new convention regarding pronouns

Singular they is old. It may be newer than the gender neutral he, but its not new

I meant having all training images with a watermark, not only some of them

It probably doesnt show the percentage if its 2%. I dont think that little of a portion would make the graph extremely misleading

Would applying a watermark to all the training images force the AI to add a watermark?