this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
61 points (95.5% liked)

TechTakes

2520 readers
68 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 27 points 1 week ago (5 children)

What is that thumbnail supposed to be...

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 33 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago

Mickse Moutse

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 3 points 1 week ago

Quatsch, no ring.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 25 points 1 week ago

a Mickey Mouse camera, obviously

[–] lettruthout@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The internet has ruined me.

[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 week ago

Are you feeling all torn open about it?

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 8 points 1 week ago

Butthole of the Mouse.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 7 points 1 week ago

Mickey Moatse

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I suspect the timing of this has a lot to do with the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the appeal regarding copyright for AI-generated visual art, which effectively upholds the Copyright Office's determination that copyright only applies to human-created works.

If Disney (or any other prospective customer) can't claim copyright over anything a generative model might produce, then it has no commercial value.

Yeah, that's definitely part of it, I think. That, combined with OpenAI's inability to make an actual ROI just made it a non-starter. I hope to see more of this in the future.

[–] lurker@awful.systems 11 points 1 week ago

Cheers, I'll drink to that

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 9 points 1 week ago

And there was much rejoice!

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago