antonim

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] antonim 6 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I tried to read about "just-in-time economy" but I really don't see how it would apply to book market?

[–] antonim 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hmm, purism can take many shapes, it's not a strictly formulated stance (even though it might act like it is "scientific" because it minds etymology). It doesn't have to be negative towards neologisms, in fact it can be very positive towards them if they're based on native material and are meant to replace loanwords.

[–] antonim 7 points 1 month ago

From the sidebar:

‘Traditional’ here means ‘Physical’, as in artworks which are NON-DIGITAL in nature.

[–] antonim 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Large AI companies themselves want people to be ignorant of how AI works, though. They want uncritical acceptance of the tech as they force it everywhere, creating a radical counterreaction from people. The reaction might be uncritical too, I'd prefer to say it's merely unjustified in specific cases or overly emotional, but it doesn't come from nowhere or from sheer stupidity. We have been hearing about people treating their chatbots as sentient beings since like 2022 (remember that guy from Google?), bombarded with doomer (or, from AI companies' point of view, very desirable) projections about AI replacing most jobs and wreaking havoc on world economy - how are ordinary people supposed to remain calm and balanced when hearing such stuff all the time?

[–] antonim 2 points 1 month ago

Oh man...

That is the point, to show how AI image generators easily fail to produce something that rarely occurs out there in reality (i.e. is absent from training data), even though intuitively (from the viewpoint of human intelligence) it seems like it should be trivial to portray.

[–] antonim 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, I don't think that would fly.

"Your honour, I was just hoarding that terabyte of Hollywood films, I haven't actually watched them."

[–] antonim 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Bro are you a robot yourself? Does that look like a glass full of wine?

[–] antonim 2 points 1 month ago

AI can “learn” from and “read” a book in the same way a person can and does,

If it's in the same way, then why do you need the quotation marks? Even you understand that they're not the same.

And either way, machine learning is different from human learning in so many ways it's ridiculous to even discuss the topic.

AI doesn’t reproduce a work that it “learns” from

That depends on the model and the amount of data it has been trained on. I remember the first public model of ChatGPT producing a sentence that was just one word different from what I found by googling the text (from some scientific article summary, so not a trivial sentence that could line up accidentally). More recently, there was a widely reported-on study of AI-generated poetry where the model was requested to produce a poem in the style of Chaucer, and then produced a letter-for-letter reproduction of the well-known opening of the Canterbury Tales. It hasn't been trained on enough Middle English poetry and thus can't generate any of it, so it defaulted to copying a text that probably occurred dozens of times in its training data.

[–] antonim 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Facebook (Meta) torrented TBs from Libgen, and their internal chats leaked so we know about that, and IIRC they've been sued. Maybe you're thinking of that case?

[–] antonim 4 points 1 month ago

while land cannot be truly owned, it can be in use by people,

What can be "truly owned", and what does that entail?

If somethinɡ is merely "in use" by someone, can it be stolen from the user?

What is stealing? Doesn't stealing, as we intuitively understand it, presuppose (depriving someone of) ownership?

Let's say we find ourselves in this situation: you've loaned a book from the library, and someone stole it. Intuitively we might say the book was stolen from you. But that's mainly because it was temporarily associated with you; you didn't really own it, the harm for you is lesser than it would be if a book you bought was stolen, and more substantial harm affects the library that legally owns the book.

The book is stolen from the library. That's bad for the library. The land is stolen from...? Who is that bad for?

The analogy can only go so far, of course. The actual details of how Native Americans'(?) land was stolen include stuff like

Past treaties that had transferred land ownership employed a wide range of unethical or illegal tactics. Clauses, written in English but never mentioned to the Native signers, might appear in the “official” document.

Illegitimate “chiefs” also signed treaties. The Creek complained bitterly in 1825 that the Treaty of Indian Springs, which sold virtually all of the Tribe’s remaining land, had been signed by individuals not authorized to make such a sale. The Federal Government’s negotiators were well aware of this. The Tribe’s senior leaders had refused to sell and left the negotiations. After the senior leadership had left, the negotiators turned to the few remaining minor chiefs and persuaded them to sign the treaty.

https://www.cmich.edu/research/clarke-historical-library/explore-collection/explore-online/native-american-material/native-american-treaty-rights/land-transfers

Which is all basically theft through deception and similar. But to judge it that way we do have to already assume that the Natives owned the land that they were then cheated out of...

[–] antonim 1 points 1 month ago

I (think I) remember some mazes or hallways could be generated in the shape of the swastika, but it got patched away many versions ago. Guess Evan will have to do some swastika-pruning once more.

[–] antonim 3 points 1 month ago

(you know who I’m talking about)

(I don't)

 

While we are deeply disappointed with the Second Circuit’s opinion in Hachette v. Internet Archive, the Internet Archive has decided not to pursue Supreme Court review. We will continue to honor the Association of American Publishers (AAP) agreement to remove books from lending at their member publishers’ requests.

We thank the many readers, authors and publishers who have stood with us throughout this fight. Together, we will continue to advocate for a future where libraries can purchase, own, lend and preserve digital books.

114
rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 8 months ago by antonim to c/[email protected]
 
 
 

Native English speakers, how do you use personal datives? Today I came across an interesting text on the phenomenon here. Here are some examples from the text:

4] a. I got me some candy.

b. You got you some candy.

c. We got us some candy.

5] a. He got him some candy.

b. She got her some candy.

c. *It got it some candy.

d. They got them some candy.

(5c is marked with * to mark its grammatical unacceptability)

As a non-native speaker, I find sentences (4a) and (4c) to be natural, although I'd probably never use them myself. However, other sentences are odd to me, and seem as if they would cause confusion, they could be interpreted as if the subject got the candy for someone else. (4b), with 'you', is even more odd to my ears, even though a cited study says it is much more common than 3rd person constructions.

How do you perceive these sentences, are they all acceptable/natural to you?

238
i got plenty of rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 9 months ago by antonim to c/[email protected]
 
 
371
rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 10 months ago by antonim to c/[email protected]
 
15
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by antonim to c/[email protected]
 

The dispersal of the Indo-European language family from the third millennium BCE is thought to have dramatically altered Europe’s linguistic landscape. Many of the preexisting languages are assumed to have been lost, as Indo-European languages, including Greek, Latin, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic and Armenian, dominate in much of Western Eurasia from historical times. To elucidate the linguistic encounters resulting from the Indo-Europeanization process, this volume evaluates the lexical evidence for prehistoric language contact in multiple Indo-European subgroups, at the same time taking a critical stance to approaches that have been applied to this problem in the past.

Part I: Introduction

Guus Kroonen: A methodological introduction to sub-Indo-European Europe

Part II: Northeastern and Eastern Europe

Anthony Jakob: Three pre-Balto-Slavic bird names, or: A more austere take on Oštir

Ranko Matasović: Proto-Slavic forest tree names: Substratum or Proto-Indo-European origin?

Part III: Western and Central Europe

Paulus S. van Sluis: Substrate alternations in Celtic

Anders Richardt Jørgensen: A bird name suffix *-anno- in Celtic and Gallo-Romance

David Stifter: Prehistoric layers of loanwords in Old Irish

Part IV: The Mediterranean

Andrew Wigman: A European substrate velar “suffix”

Cid Swanenvleugel: Prefixes in the Sardinian substrate

Lotte Meester: Substrate stratification: An argument against the unity of Pre-Greek

Guus Kroonen: For the nth time: The Pre-Greek νϑ-suffix revisited

Part V: Anatolia & the Caucasus

Rasmus Thorsø: Alternation of diphthong and monophthong in Armenian words of substrate origin

Zsolt Simon: Indo-European substrates: The problem of the Anatolian evidence

Peter Schrijver: East Caucasian perspectives on the origin of the word ‘camel’ and some notes on European substrate lexemes

309
funny yellow rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 10 months ago by antonim to c/[email protected]
 
 

Serbian edition from 1920.

Source: http://svevid.locloudhosting.net/items/show/1840

view more: ‹ prev next ›