FriendOfDeSoto

On that we are agreed. The headline speaks of a landmark ruling, which I think is too much acclaim for a decision a higher court could just dismiss.

I think my sniping at Bavaria speaks for itself.

They don't need sway as much as money and lawyers, which I imagine they have. And this verdict is probably on the worst outcome end of the scale for them. I cannot imagine they will accept a ruling that calls them daft like this one does. They will try to water down liability for their model's fantasy summaries. Whether they succeed is a different question. But they will try, so they will appeal, so this verdict isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Yet.

All I said is that this verdict isn't effective yet. These headlines and sadly this article buries this fact in a sentence in the last paragraph. Blink and you miss it stuff. Lemmies tend to overlook this and declare victory over Google when this was merely the first battle of the war.

This isn't final. Google has time to appeal. Let's hold off on the label "landmark" until it reaches legal effectiveness. Which it probably won't, however good a verdict by a German regional court, much less one based in Bavaria, this is in my opinion.

Google lawyers arguing in court that Google's so-called AI results are shit anyways and people should know it is chef's kiss.

"We will change the law" means they haven't changed it yet. And this PM is so god damn popular in his own party, they are just trying to get his possible replacement in in an otherwise unnecessary byelection. This sounds decisive but isn't a fait accompli by any stretch of the imagination. The tech big guns will sound amenable to such a policy but will do fuck all.

So I didn't watch this on principle because I think all these YT videos here aren't there to be informative but to increase the view numbers for the algo over there. I also already know Meta is a terrible company run by careless people so the shock value when Zuckerberg says something daft is frankly not that high.

I have however a thing to say about this video's thumbnail. We're in the FuckAI community looking at a thumbnail, whose background picture looks suspiciously like it was generated by a fucking model. We mustn't allow this to seep in through the back door just because Zuckerberg gets put on blast.

Yeah but it isn't here.

If you want to get picky, Xwitter didn't enshitify as laid out as a concept by Cory Doctorow. The best example is probably Amazon which went from being insanely user friendly to lock in users, to supplier-friendly and increasingly less so for users, until it had squeezed and shafted both groups. That's enshitification and it doesn't apply to Xwitter. They had problems to make money before a certain somebody bought it. They've been bleeding users since the eventually Nazi saluting manbaby bought it, who then wanted to sue advertisers who refused to buy ads on his service. There was no user lock-in and then a supplier lock-in. There was just shit. All their current problems are man made. By one specific man.

I would argue you cannot enshitify a service that was already shit. At this point this is more of a conshitidation.

Oh, man, this will affect tens of people.

It would be a crying shame if this stampede towards so-called AI made such a great upstanding company as Meta go under. Sad. So very sad.

Meanwhile, I'll add bankrupting Meta as a possible fourth useful thing this stuff can do. The list is currently (1) help folks with disabilities, (2) help in medicine, (3) defraud MAGA supporters and now this will come next.

That introspection won't last, will it.

Which tool did you use to have this post written?