Similar to copyright, enforcement requires surveillance and empowers censorship. But worse than copyright, it is directly aimed at information about people. So that is what gets surveilled and censored.

Of course, there are positive uses, such as disappearing revenge porn. But in practice, it will always favor the rich and powerful who have the resources to actively manage their image. I don’t believe it is worth the massive surveillance and censorship apparatus, even before one gets to the obvious potential for misuse.

Have you heard of the recent Russmedia case?

How did free speech help when the Nazis humiliated jews publicly in the 1930s?

How did it help taking “jew-baiters” like Julius Streicher to court during the Weimar Republic? Obviously it didn’t.

It seems obvious that I want the state to prevent hate speech, especially against minorities.

You want the state to act against hate speech coming from the elected head of state. What about that seems like a good plan?

You can’t convince people that Trump is a bad guy, and so you want the state to go after the bad guys. Maybe you can convince people that the state should smash bad guys. It’s not hard. But Trump is in charge of the state and not you. He’ll decide who’s a bad guy.

Really good. I wouldt have given full marks. Semi-precious gemstone isn’t good enough. Too much reliance on the pronunciation. Good pun, though, I feel. Very groan.

Nono, you’re thinking of circumference. This is about a semi-precious gemstone in the shape of a small, domesticated mustelid.

ETA: Maybe it’s too hard. I am thinking of a …

Nono, you’re thinking of circumlocution. This is about building a wall around a besieged city.

Nono, you’re thinking of a convention. This is about a psychological treatment that makes gay men like women.

Yeah, he has his own Mastodon instance. I was trying to make a different point, though.

People couldn’t even agree to keep Trump away from government, even though that’s a no-brainer. If you react by trying to build a consensus that some people should be banned from social media, you may get that consensus. But it won’t be Trump who is banned. That is a no-brainer, too.

It’s shockingly fascist thinking, actually.

It is real. There is a lot of hypocrisy, particularly among the right. But the difference between Europe and the US is stark.

Compare the criticism of the DMCA or Google’s Content ID to this affair. It’s on completely different levels.

As a European, I’ve really come around to a more American view of Free Speech.

Over the last few years, we get more and more laws requiring more and more surveillance and censorship to protect copyright, stop hate speech, enforce GDPR, … We’re building up this infrastructure and the population thinks it’s fine. The courts go along and ask for more.

What is going to happen when a European Trump comes to power? You think it’s terrible that Big Tech goes along with Trump? That Must bought Twitter? We ain’t seen nothing yet.

the Italian law is overly broad here, but that doesn’t excuse this behaviour.

This behavior = Going to court.

And who is going to ban Trump from Twitter?

The assumption seems to be that an LLM can’t figure out a manual or source code. If it can’t, then you have to pay people. But that’s not a universally valid assumption.

You can’t exactly feed it a manual and expect it to extrapolate or understand (for that matter “what manual).

You can do that to a degree (RLVR). They are also paying human experts. But that’s the situation now. Who knows how it will be in a couple more years. Maybe training AIs will be like writing a library, framework, …

https://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/1926661#graph

Stick a fork in it.