You're implying that this falls under the APA's notice-and-comment procedure for rule *making*? But you also suggested above USCO is non-binding and only provides guidance / advice. Which is it? I can see why you bailed out, their delay makes no sense and can't be defended.
@alexjc
-
Experts Bypass Public Consultation: Strategic Unwillingness Analysis
By
–
They had no obligation to do a massive call for comments, including internationals. They are experts, could have written a 1-page opinion ages ago like Neil suggested. It's not that they were unable, the fact they didn't is because they were unwilling to do so. Why?
-
Tech Giants’ Inaction on AI: A Strategic Choice After Two Years
By
–
You said it was a "smart move" — thus implying intent. Since it's been two years people have been calling on action from them, the fact it hasn't happened yet is a choice.
-
USCO Uncertainty Allows Big Tech to Normalize AI Technology
By
–
The longer the USCO leaves things uncertain — which Aaron implies is intentional — the longer Big Tech has to normalize the technology. This interpretation seems to fit with the agenda here.
-
Nightly builds performance degradation slower than training
By
–
The latest nightlies seems particularly slow. Takes much longer than the training run itself now!
-
YouTube copyright enforcement liability and third-party accountability concerns
By
–
How is this going to be enforced? Likely the fine print specifies that YouTube is under no obligation to hold third-parties accountable, and also under no obligation to assist in court cases filed by rightholders.
-
Post-Ironic Market Dominance Strategy and Profit Sharing
By
–
This! Except do it post-ironically, not just ironically. Actually win the bulk of the market, then split the profits…
-
Guadamuz Copyright Corruption AI Policy Legitimization Critique
By
–
Guadamuz is the OG of Copyright corruption! He knew policymakers would legitimize AI at all costs even before we caught them and documented the process. I'm not saying he's technically or legally corrupt himself, just informally and colloquially I understand why people think so.
-
AI Copyright Lawsuits: Malpractice Claims Against Plaintiff Law Firms
By
–
Plaintiff lawfirms that have not yet replicated such verbatim examples from defendant's models are either unwilling or unable to do the work they were hired for. Either way, it's strong case for malpractice at this stage. ikykyk
-
Copyright memorization in AI models: legal and policy disputes
By
–
Copyrighted information being memorized by models is still contested in courts because it's not treated as a technical nor legal matter, it's a policy question that was unilaterally decided already… (They're expecting everyone to fall in line.) Great thread of examples!