We have seen authoritarian communism that regressed into autocratic nationalist imperialist communism. We have also seen authoritarian communism that has shifted into state capitalism. Just like there are many variations of capitalism that we have and have not seen, there are likewise many of socialism and even communism that we have and have not seen.

I imagine not, though I haven’t looked into it.

God, why is the games industry so fucking illiterate when it comes to IP law. File a trademark opposition? They’re suing! File a patent application without issued claims or even substantive examination? They’ve patented it! These aren’t crazy fucking complicated concepts, but the journalism for games industries like actively stunts the understanding of these things by the market.

If you say shit like this, you’re not a leftist, you’re just a memer. Practical outcomes and actionability are always more important than your petty puerile impulse for myopic catharsis. Introspect and do better.

It isn’t quite what you’ve italicized, but make no mistake that’s it’s still a terrible precedent to set. Preliminary injunctions can still be granted by district courts, but now they need to be brought in the form of a class action and all the tediousness that entails. ACLU thankfully had one ready to go it seems just in case of this and it’s been filed already.

Nevertheless, this also enables insane infringement of the first amendment. There is nothing stopping him from declaring membership of a particular political party is illegal, including state parties, and then requiring each state to independently challenge under a restricted class action. It’s ludicrous.

There are many open sourced locally executable free generative models available.

You are agreeing with the post you responded to. This ruling is only about training a model on legally obtained training data. It does not say it is ok to pirate works–if you pirate a work, no matter what you do with the infringing copy you’ve made, you’ve committed copyright infringement. It does not talk about model outputs, which is a very nuanced issue and likely to fall along similar analyses as music copyright imo. It only talks about whether training a model is intrinsically an infringement of copyright. And it isn’t because anything else is insane and be functionally impossible to differentiate from learning a writing technique by reading a book you bought from an author. Even a model that has overfit training data, it is in no way recognizable to any particular training datum. It’s hyperdimensioned matrix of numbers defining relationships between features and relationships between relationships.