If it could output PNG, it could be adapted as a code block with its own language in org-mode.

Is there something similar for org-mode?

You can’t. The later values depend on the earlier ones, so changing the early tokens invalidates your whole cache.

This is also probably why leading with a question works better in the first place. All later processing conditions on the question in this way.

BTW, in my very limited testing, GPT4 doesn’t care about the order.

As a PoC who has benefited from IRC, I don’t see how they would even know you’re not white unless you tell them yourself. Can you elaborate on your experience?

Is any AI generated image even illegal, assuming originality and difference from training set?

ChatGPT is pretty good at coding. I have been using its LaTeX capabilities, where bugs don’t matter.

ChatGPT passes the kid Turing test!

> passes the kid Turing test

There exists an interpretation of that statement that makes it a tautology.

Edit: and/or makes it circular/symmetrical - "What is a "kid"" (a Turing test mis-labeller). A good AGI was required to be able to convince a panel - assuming an ideal panel, the usual simplification "employing" perfect agents in economic modelling -, and there now exist new means to conversely assess the panel.

If you don’t want other humans to remix information you have broadcasted, then don’t broadcast in the first place. It’s not like you haven’t been using other people’s ideas in your “original” work.

How can you miss read something this hard?

Even now it is perfectly fine for you to make your own original character influenced by Harry Potter or Mikey Mouse. Heck make it a Wizard Mouse called Marry Motter. Still you can't - and in my mind shouldn't - be able to write Harry Potter and the Magical Mouse.

So you are presumably OK with Disney, Sony, etc. grabbing a recent book and making a movie out of it without giving the original author a cent or any credit?

It's an interesting question. Maybe copyright shouldn't be shorter, but the better answer is something like a mechanical license to cover a music composition. After the first publication, anyone can remix for a set fee. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_license

This is how it works now.

If someone holds a copyright, you can license it from them if they so desire. The fee is determined by your legal team and theirs.

That's not how it works now, except for music. From the wikipedia article on mechanical licenses (the link I provided):

"Within copyright law within the United states, such mechanical licenses are compulsory; any party may obtain a license without permission of the license holder by paying a set license fee, that as of 2018, was set at 9.1 cents per composition or 1.75 cents per minute of composition, whichever is more, which are to go to the composition copyright holder."

Note "compulsory". There are a multitude of written and art works that are effectively copyright zombies: they are clearly within the term of copyright, but there is no clear owner to reach out to in order to license them. Hence generally out of fear of a lawsuit, they are dead as inspirations for other works.

Further, to your exact point, "if they so desire. The fee is determined by your legal team and theirs." If the author wants to be restrictive, their work will never be able to be inspirational to another work. Even if they are open to the idea, the concept that lawyers (probably) have to get involved reasonably has to diminish the number of works that are likely ever to be inspirational for other works by an enormous number.

The difference is the (generally) required licensing and the set fee.

For example, as I understand it, a playwright can basically say "I don't let high schools or colleges stage my works." With respect to book adaptations, there were actually some issues with Sorkin's script for To Kill a Mockingbird because he made some changes in Atticus Finch's character development relative to the book.

Not OP, but I'd be fine with copyright being limited to exactly "must credit any works used that were created by other people".

But yes, abolishing copyright other than ensuring credit is given is the right move. The scenario you bring up wouldn't happen like you're thinking though. Disney or Sony would be free to make a movie using other people's art, but they'd have no legal means to enforce that people give them money to watch it, so behaving unethically would be a great way to not get any money from making it.

The Japanese wore masks before Covid all the time.

org-mode has some spaced repetitions tools (e.g., org-drill). I personally don't recommend SR by flashcards too much. It's better to do it more naturally. For example, read books regularly to learn a language; common words will repeat themselves enough times that they'll effectively be a form of SR.