Linux is a lot, lot, lot easier to use now than the 90s.

Mobile phones in the era before smartphones had cameras, email clients, games, music players, and even web browsers. They just weren’t very good at those functions and their core feature was being a phone for voice calls. Texting was barely a feature on some of them (the first camera phone in the United States, the Sanyo SCP-5300, didn’t have a two way text messaging client - the user had to go to a website on the phone to send texts, which was inconvenient even on a 1xRTT 3G connection.)

The e-ink phone seems closer to a dumbphone than a smartphone, IMO, largely because it lacks access to an app store.

Source: I sold mobile phones before smartphones and during the early smartphone years (BlackBerry and Palm Treo, for example.)

Edit: calling it a feature phone instead of a dumb phone might be more accurate.

This also grinds my gears, especially after so many officers die during the course of the series. So many junior officer ranks are time-defined promotions (in real life) and even if they weren’t time based, slots opened up due to all the people dying.

I hate to break it to you, but if you’re running an LLM based on (for example) Llama the training data (corpus) that went into it was still large parts of the Internet.

The fact that you’re running the prompts locally doesn’t change the fact that it was still trained on data that could be considered protected under copyright law.

It’s going to be interesting to see how the law shakes out on this one, because an artist going to an art museum and doing studies of those works (and let’s say it’s a contemporary art museum where the works wouldn’t be in the public domain) for educational purposes is likely fair use - and possibly encouraged to help artists develop their talents. Musicians practicing (or even performing) other artists’ songs is expected during their development. Consider some high school band practicing in a garage, playing some song to improve their skills.

I know the big difference is that it’s people training vs a machine/LLM training, but that seems to come down to not so much a copyright issue (which it is in an immediate sense) as a “should an algorithm be entitled to the same protections as a person? If not, what if real AI (not just an LLM) is developed? Should those entities be entitled to personhood?”