But if I was an Iranian operative with instructions to damage the morale of the American war machine, I'd absolutely do a series of things like this.
It doesn't really harm anyone, but enough similar events and the families of servicemembers start to feel unsafe, which is psychologically very different than the servicemembers themselves feeling unsafe.
It's probably more benign than that, most likely firmware or a central controller failure, but still
So I'm guessing you don't do anything except what matters to billions of people? Always 100% fully generalized contributions, never making your local world a better place? Your only local contributions being to tell off people who are grateful that their lives are materially improved by someone else's smaller actions... You must be beloved by your community.
I don't think the point you're trying to make improves the quality of the discussion here. If a downstream project laments a license and the author changes it, that's good communication and cooperation. Complaining that people are happy with the outcome isn't productive.
Making one small corner of the world a little bit better is a good thing. There's not much use in complaining that it's not as big of an impact as could hypothetically be achieved on some larger issues.
“He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars. General good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite, and flatterer.” -- William Blake
:) Alternative reply to lighten mood in odd thread:
Not to be Debbie Downer but making one small corner of the world a little bit better has no effect on what matters to billions of people.
We are facing very real global and societal issues that people are actively exacerbating.
If a dude explaining that there’s not much use in complaining robs you of hope for the world, then please broaden your perspective.
This is verifiably false. Without copyleft licensing like the GPL or permissive licensing like MIT and Apache we literally would not have the internet, or it would be somehow even more wildly dystopian and proprietary than it already is.
Not GP but I feel like that's kinda their point - the fact that we still have this platform to collaborate in such an organic way is truly remarkable and must not be taken for granted.
People are concerned about having homes to live in and having food to eat. They aren't concerned about 'device lockdown'. Try to see the bigger picture.
Where I live the city commissioned its own mobile app for parking, and all numbered parking spots in the city use that app.
There are private lots that use Honk or Robbins or whatever, but the municipal lots and all parallel parking spaces downtown all use the same single app and the revenue goes to the city.
The city parking app works reasonably well, no ads, it just does one thing. If you leave early you open the app and hit "stop parking" and it only charges you the 37 cents or whatever that you actually consumed. It sends you a push notification when your parking is about to expire. And if you don't like the app for whatever reason, you can still pay with a card at the pay machines on every block. It's unglamorous, but it's fantastic technology.
That seems reasonable. The kiosk is still there to pay with cards or cash directly, but the app/website lets you skip that, avoid printing a slip, maybe buy a pass or something.
The risk is mainly that down the road someone looks at the usage numbers and goes hmm, well the kiosk is only getting used 5% of the time, let's just discontinue supporting it.
The other risk is that they make it cheaper via the app/website, maybe by offering a pass or something. Then that's effectively discrimination against people who don't have a big tech phone.
Not just that how the maintainer was treated by the attacker which tells you something about the way people feel entitled to maintainers time and efforts for nothing even by people not looking to exploit the project. And the abuse after he received despite it being an easy mistake that the culture encourages people to make.
> And the abuse after he received despite it being an easy mistake that the culture encourages people to make.
I believe that that was in part simply people defending their reality.
Because if it's not the maintainers fault, then why did it fail? What are the implications of that? What does it mean for me personally? Do I have to do something differently? Do I have to change my assumptions?
People do not like these feelings. They want to simply push them away.
The easiest way of doing so is blaming that guy and being done with the negative emotion.
Most people do suck at this whole "being human" business.
HuggingFace offers abliterated/uncensored models, which would seem to run contrary to the "AI is too powerful for regular people" narrative that the big players are pushing.
My primary concern is that Nvidia will bow to the pressure and restrict abliterated/uncensored models on HF.
Having Nvidia behind HF will now probably have a bunch of litigious entities salivating to sue them for not only allowing, but also distributing uncensored AI models that will then be used for deepfakes, porn, spam, scam, hacking, etc.
Sure that could have also been done to HF before, but I'm thinking Nvidia is a much juicier target.
Should also now be much easier for the government to just eventually force NVidia to restrict access to Chinese open models seeing as it will now become an American company that needs to obey to American law and we all know how American AI companies are lobbying for exactly that.
>Should also now be much easier for the government to just eventually force NVidia to restrict access to Chinese open models seeing as it will now become an American company that needs to obey to American law and we all know how American AI companies are lobbying for exactly that.
Using regulation to avoid having to be competitive is the American Way!
In all seriousness though, probably time to start an underground equivalent to HF.
OP said they will bow to pressure, which just means that governments will be able to control nv and get them to ban the obliterated models, implement ’safety’ controls on all uploaded models.
reply