That's the absolute best possible outcome... The more severe risk is where a neighborhood child gets severely injured and then the liability policy/coverage you were relying on as a homeowner is invalidated because you failed to disclose the trampoline (which is one of the things they typically ask for). Now you are stuck with legal + medical bills which will likely bankrupt you and/or cost you that house.
Same with pitbulls. Like "neat you hid it from your insurance company, boy you sure showed them!" They are going to be so super sad to cash all of your premium checks for years and THEN pay out $0 on the liability claim when fido rips a kids face off.
> But during covid archive.org decided to just remove the limit and lend unlimited copies concurrently
IIRC, this was 100% it. Lending one digital version of one physical asset was likely already a violation copyright. Lending UNLIMITED digital versions of one physical copy was DEFINITELY a blatant violation of copyright.
"IA maintains that it delivers each Work “only to one already entitled to view [it]”―i.e., the one person who would be entitled to check out the physical copy of each Work. But this characterization confuses IA’s practices with traditional library lending of print books. IA does not perform the traditional functions of a library; it prepares derivatives of Publishers’ Works and delivers those derivatives to its users in full. That Section 108 allows libraries to make a small number of copies for preservation and replacement purposes does not mean that IA can prepare and distribute derivative works en masse and assert that it is simply performing the traditional functions of a library. 17 U.S.C. § 108; see also, e.g., ReDigi, 910 F.3d at 658 (“We are not free to disregard the terms of the statute merely because the entity performing an unauthorized reproduction makes efforts to nullify its consequences by the counterbalancing destruction of the preexisting phonorecords.”)."
So weird that the same exact people telling you that programming careers are now obsolete are the same group who haven't been able to fix screen flickering bugs for like a year...
My guess is that they ran selective search on the domains which get registered with any registrar, thats the trigger to start the search. .gov domains are not managed by your typical registrar which is selling the domain registration information to all these downstream partners/scavengers (for lack of better word)
The OP says it's using CT logs, not new domain registrations. The approach you have in mind would not include subdomains and would be less likely to coincide with a new server being configured.
Yes CT is explicitly stated source which is why I qualified it with "Guess" for domain registration. There were couple reasons for that -
1. Quite a few websites in the search results where just on HTTP
2. The .gov sites do use public certificate authorities like digicert, verisign, amazon & letencrypt so they would have been captured unless they are removed explicitly
And yes the domain registration would not include subdomains
This is the same exact industry that gives you paid usage limits as a unit-less percentage bar then gaslights customers every time the algorithm running that percentage bar changes or they lobotomize an existing model with increased quantization to squeeze a few more dollars out of existing hardware.
"Failing cleanly" might make their moated hype-machine look bad pre-IPO, so they certainly aren't going to do that voluntarily.
So far I have mixed impressions, but they do indeed seem noticeably weaker than comparably-sized Qwen3 / GLM4.5 models. Part of the reason may be that the oai models do appear to be much more lobotomized than their Chinese counterparts (which are surprisingly uncensored). There's research showing that "aligning" a model makes it dumber.
The censorship here in China is only about public discussions / spaces. You cannot like have a website telling you about the crimes of the party. But downloading some compressed matrix re-spouting the said crimes, nobody gives a damn.
We seem to censor organized large scale complaints and viral mind virii, but we never quite forbid people at home to read some generated knowledge from an obscure hard to use software.
That is fine as long as the input / output is always in UTC... but at the end of the day you often want to communicate that timepoint to a human user (e.g. an appointment time, the time at which some event happened, etc.), which is when our stupid monkey brains expect the ascii string you are showing us to actually make sense in our specific locale (including all of the warts each of those particular timezones have, including leap second, DST, etc.)
It is not, if what the user expects to stay constant is their local calendar/wall clock time rather than the UTC instant. Which is usually the case. This is a transformation that needs late binding as DST and timezone rules can change, so it can't just be handled as a localisation transformation on input/output
Same with pitbulls. Like "neat you hid it from your insurance company, boy you sure showed them!" They are going to be so super sad to cash all of your premium checks for years and THEN pay out $0 on the liability claim when fido rips a kids face off.
reply