Doesn't really work that way, though. I'd love to run SeeDance 2.5 locally, but there's no way to download the weights, short of heavily bribing some Chinese engineer maybe.
Yeahhhh not sure I actually want that in my home! But even if I had it, what am I actually gonna run on it?
I did. I bought myself a 4090 as soon as Stable Diffusion hit GitHub. But there are still limits to what you can do with one box.
Well that was infuriatingly pointless. It was just a kid who can't write having a mental health crisis, but worse still, he dedicated multiple paragraphs to telling us how unbelievably interesting his life is and then didn't tell us a single thing about it.
I run a bunch of generative AI locally, but if I'm being honest: it's not very good.
I can run some version of Llama and get an LLM with a pea-sized brain that fixates and hallucinates. I can run Flux 2 Dev and get sorta-good pictures. I can run WAN 2.2 and get absolutely atrocious video.
But none of it compares to the commercial tools.
I'm not sure how close we are to the limit of what can be done locally. I wonder if SeeDance 2.5 could even run on a 24GB card. And if so, how big would the weights be - a full terabyte?
I was all about DIY AI last year but now... I don't know, everything available just feels so primitive.
I don't believe that you know the difference between proving something and saying that you proved something. But you will, indeed, type HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA because that's... that's what I'm dealing with, here.
We both violated c/Conspiracies' rules by being disrespectful to each other.
Neither of us have violated the "site rules," given that there is no prohibition against disrespect on Scored/Communities.
I'll tell you exactly what I think of you on another community; you can count on that.
I mean, I guess I'm free to have a "conversation" where I repeatedly simply deny that anyone is paying me to be here while Skil gets all his replies removed because he's incapable of civility.
I don't know what good that would do for anybody, though.
I am most certainly not a bot account, and since I'm not allowed to respond to you on this particular board, I just have to report everything you try to say to me.
number 1 kills most of the interest. (guys! check this funny pic/video/thing/site! oh wait. we can't. this place sucks.)
I think that might be a feature rather than a bug. There are ten thousand places on the Internet competing to be where you show off a funny pic. Whereas a free-speech discussion forum is something that does not seem to exist at all right now.
And you don't think that this motherfucker repeatedly calling me a paid Jew is respectful and not making a personal attack?
See, here's what I'm thinking.
-
You make it text-only. No support for binaries at all. No support for hyperlinking, even. Just: language.
-
You create an AI bot to remove any commercial activity.
-
You put up a notice saying that you DO cooperate with law enforcement and subpoenas, so this isn't a place you want to be talking about illegal activity or CSAM.
-
You create broad-spectrum user tools for blocking low-quality contributors.
-
And you find a DDoS Protection Provider.
Seems to me that covers like 99% of your bases right there... it can't truly be that expensive to run a text-only forum.
As far as I know, Cloudflare's not that far from free and open - it won't allow CSAM repositories or forums for planning mass school shootings or fomenting armed rebellion, but it doesn't freak out over, say, radical ideologies or porn or most forms of shock content.
Or is that wrong?
I guess it's dead-ish. It's not the kind of place where you can just sit and actively chat with people without long waiting periods.
It's disappointing to me that there's no place like that - some non-corporate web forum where you can just talk about anything with anyone. Seems like it should be possible, and yet people mostly still go on Reddit where you're required to confirm to all majority opinions while unpaid basement-dwellers arbitrarily decide whether you pass their purity tests and bots scrape up every piece of data they can find about you.
Why do they do that? It's like they don't realize that they don't have to.
It's the last sentence in the Wikipedia lede.
"Both of these bills were referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, which did not pass them out of committee, and they died there."
It then cites these two pages to show that the bills did not become law:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5595
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/6940
...but it doesn't. Because, just as it says in the Wikipedia article, that bill died in committee and never became law.
It's a common thing for our Congress to do. The majority party in the House passes some egregiously unconstitutional bill to throw some red meat to their base, and then the Senate puts it in a drawer. That way, the party can get the headline and doesn't have to get the rebuke from the SCOTUS.
It says what it is right in the article. "Several U.S. states have passed legislation that bars state agencies from working with and investing in companies that boycott Israel."
So if you've got a landscaping business and it says on your website that you boycott Israel, don't expect to get any work or funding from the Parks and Rec department.
But none of this makes it illegal to boycott. Boycotting is a guaranteed First Amendment right.
It never became law. The House voted on it in an act of virtue-signalling, and the Senate put it in a drawer and ignored it because it was never actually supposed to be the law. This one's just politics.
That law makes it illegal to comply with a foreign boycott. So if you want to import aluminum from the UAE, and the supplier says "We only do businesses with entities who observe the Arab League boycott, so we need you to sign this pledge not to purchase any Israeli products before we'll sell you aluminum," it's illegal to sign the pledge.
It's a very niche-case law. It doesn't affect domestic boycotts at all. If you say "Let's boycott Israel because of the genocide" and I say "okay, let's," that's completely legal for both of us to do.
Also, I think OP is pointing to the fact that it's actually illegal to boycott Israel in the US. A strange law, wouldn't you agree?
It would be - and it would be obviously unconstitutional - but there is no such law.
If I say "I'm not gonna buy Israeli products; who's with me," that's my right. There's no state or Federal law against it. No one's gonna show up at my door to haul me away.
There are laws like "Nevada will not accept bids from contractors who boycott Israel." That kind of law is constitutional; Nevada (generally) has the right to accept or refuse business as it sees fit.
When that gets twisted into "It's illegal to buycott Israel in the state of Nevada," it's pretty dishonest.
Those were definitely not "7 rapists." (You don't have to censor the word 'rapist.' That's weird.)
The Cornell case is complicated. The girl apparently wanted to get drunk and high and have a threesome with two dudes. That happened. It was very obviously consensual. But then she got too drunk and high, and as many as five other guys also fucked her. The consent there is shaky. She explicitly said it wasn't rape; then she got really ashamed of herself; then after a while she changed her mindset to "Well I wasn't really in any condition to make decisions, maybe I was raped."
Some of those dudes are obviously completely in the clear; some are grey-area; it's possible one or two of them effectively raped an incapacitated woman. The courts are going to have to decide. At the time Cornell assigned essays, I believe she was still in the "I wasn't raped but goddamn did I get passed around that frat" stage.
As for "States that you can't boycott or support a boycott of Israel..." well that depends on who "you" are. If you're the owner of a construction company bidding on a new courthouse, you can't boycott Israel or you won't get the contract. If you're a CEO running a pension fund, you can't boycott Israel or the state will choose a different pension fund.
If you're just some guy, there's absolutely no law against boycotting Israeli products; that's your First Amendment right. And in any case, these laws aren't criminal; they're administrative. They direct the state on where to direct its own funding.
But you'd surely agree that some of the greatest figures in history weren't respectful, right? I mean, Thomas Paine was not respectful. Thomas Paine didn't say "Please, sah, let me speak my piece." Thomas Paine shoved his erect cock right through his fly.
lol. So the duct tape goes around EVERYONE'S mouth and you're going to brag about that like it's a good thing.
It's not about power, it's about software. SeeDance 2.5 is proprietary, and it's kept only on ByteDance servers. There's no way to get it onto your own machines short of crime - hacking, bribery, social engineering, whatever. It's not just sitting on GitHub saying "You can use this if you've got the power."
If I spent a million dollars and built a kickass home server, I could run a really nice instance of Llama, but it would look distinctly retarded next to Gemini, because Alphabet has done all kinds of proprietary stuff that I simply cannot download at any price. (Or at least not at any price that isn't the trillion or so dollars it would cost to buy Alphabet).