- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

180° Mercoledì di Nexa | 12 febbraio 2025, ore 17.00

by Nexa - Media

Gentilissime, gentilissimi, Vi invitiamo a partecipare al 180° Mercoledì di Nexa, che si terrà mercoledì 12 febbraio, alle ore 17.00, con un incontro dal titolo "Free/Libre software and freedom in the digital society". Ospite dell'incontro: Dr. Richard Stallman (Founder of the Free Software Foundation, Founder and development leader of the GNU operating system). L'incontro si terrà IN PRESENZA e ONLINE. SEDE FISICA dell'incontro: Aula 27<https://www.polito.it/en/maps?bl_id=TO_CEN05&fl_id=XPTE&rm_id=B056>, Sede Centrale del Politecnico di Torino (primo piano) - Corso Castelfidardo 39, Torino (MAPPA<https://www.google.com/maps/place/45%C2%B003'45.8%22N+7%C2%B039'35.2%22E/@45.0627102,7.6597771,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d45.0627102!4d7.6597771?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDEyMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D>) STANZA VIRTUALE dell'incontro: https://didattica.polito.it/VClass/NexaEvent Di seguito maggiori dettagli: https://nexa.polito.it/mercoledi-180 L'incontro si terrà in lingua inglese. Cordiali saluti, -- Valeria Bergantino Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society Politecnico di Torino - DAUIN Via Pier Carlo Boggio, 65/A - 10138 Torino web: https://nexa.polito.it/ mail: valeria.bergantino(a)polito.it<mailto:valeria.bergantino@polito.it> tel: 3473443585

Feb. 3, 2025

[OT] Re: Elon Musk’s Team Now Has Full Access to Treasury’s Payments System

by 380°

Buongiorno, secondo me siamo decisamente OT in questa lista, non è che qualsiasi cosa Musk fa o dice rientra per forza in "Internet e società"; certo mi chiedo perché diavolo affidare a lui un ruolo del genere, cosa che /da sola/ non fa che _incasinare_ qualsiasi discussione, con persone che tentano di buttarla in vacca ogni tre per due solo per il fatto che c'è di mezzo Musk comunque... Daniela Tafani <daniela.tafani(a)unipi.it> writes: > Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave Mr. Musk’s representatives at > the so-called Department of Government Efficiency a powerful tool to > monitor and potentially limit government spending. > > By Andrew Duehren, Maggie Haberman, Theodore Schleifer and Alan Rappeport > Feb. 1, 2025 > > Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave representatives of the so-called > Department of Government Efficiency full access to the federal payment > system late on Friday, according to three people familiar with the > change, handing Elon Musk and the team he is leading a powerful tool > to monitor and potentially limit government spending. Ammetto la mia discreta ignoranza nel "galateo" istituzionale USA, ma ci mancherebbe altro che un governo non possa istituire un ente (in italia si chiamerebbe "Autorità"?) per /mettere il naso/ nel CASINO INDICIBILE dei conti USA (poi vedremo sulla _vera_ natura degli eventuali tagli). Ricordo sommessamente che da tempo immemore schiere di /complottisti/ più o meno mainstream sostengono che il "black budget" USA abbia proporzioni spaventose [...] > [continua qui: > <https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/01/us/politics/elon-musk-doge-federal-payme…>] Questa lotta di potere continuerà per diverso tempo e farà MOLTO più scalpore di così: «Top Treasury Official Announces Resignation — Comes at the Same Time Elon Musk and DOGE Team Discover Treasury Is Funding Terrorist Groups» By Jim Hoft Feb. 1, 2025 11:20 am https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/02/top-treasury-official-announces-re… Dopotutto _nessuno_ può seriamente pensare che l'improvvisa /morte celebrale/ di USAID [1] non sia _strettamente_ connessa all'"audit" del "government spending" USA: «USAID officials put on leave as Elon Musk says time for agency to ‘die’» https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2025/2/3/usaid-officials-put-on-leave-as-… ...ma non possiamo nemmeno ignorare l'elefante nella stanza, SUVVIA: Tulsi Gabbard :-D Complottisti Saluti, 380° [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/website-usaid-appears-be-offline-2025-02-0… (il sito è offline anche adesso) -- 380° (Giovanni Biscuolo public alter ego) «Noi, incompetenti come siamo, non abbiamo alcun titolo per suggerire alcunché» Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org>.

Feb. 3, 2025

Re: [nexa] Elon Musk’s Team Now Has Full Access to Treasury’s Payments System

by Stefano Quintarelli

mi ricorda quando dicevo che il potere digitale nelle mani dell'esecutivo è un nuovo potere che mi fa molta più paura dei GAFAM, dato che ha il monopolio della forza.. On 02/02/25 22:13, Daniela Tafani wrote: > Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave Mr. Musk’s representatives at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency a powerful tool to monitor and potentially limit government spending. > > By Andrew Duehren, Maggie Haberman, Theodore Schleifer and Alan Rappeport > Feb. 1, 2025 > > Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave representatives of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency full access to the federal payment system late on Friday, according to three people familiar with the change, handing Elon Musk and the team he is leading a powerful tool to monitor and potentially limit government spending. > > The new authority follows a standoff this week with a top Treasury official who had resisted allowing Mr. Musk’s lieutenants into the department’s payment system, which sends out money on behalf of the entire federal government. The official, a career civil servant named David Lebryk, was put on leave and then suddenly retired on Friday after the dispute, according to people familiar with his exit. > [...] > The Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, is not a government department, but a team within the administration. It was put together at Mr. Trump’s direction by Mr. Musk to fan out across federal agencies seeking ways to cut spending, reduce the size of the federal work force and bring more efficiency to the bureaucracy. Most of those working on the initiative were recruited by Mr. Musk and his aides. > > Similar DOGE teams have begun demanding access to data and systems at other federal agencies, but none of those agencies control the flow of money in the way the Treasury Department does. > > Mr. Bessent granted access to the payments system to a handful of staff members affiliated with DOGE, including Tom Krause, the chief executive of a Silicon Valley company, Cloud Software Group, according to one of the people familiar with the change. Access to the system has historically been closely held because it includes sensitive personal information about the millions of Americans who receive Social Security checks, tax refunds and other payments from the federal government. > > A Treasury Department spokesman, a spokeswoman for DOGE and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. > > In a process typically run by civil servants, the Treasury Department carries out payments submitted by agencies across the government, disbursing more than $5 trillion in fiscal year 2023. > > Former officials said the onus was on individual agencies to ensure their payments are proper, not the relatively small staff at the Treasury Department, which is responsible for making more than one billion payments per year. > Mr. Lebryk, the career Treasury official who retired on Friday, had resisted requests from members of Mr. Trump’s transition team for access to the data last month. After Mr. Trump took office, the White House indicated that he should be removed from the job and, according to a person familiar with the matter, Mr. Bessent suggested putting him on leave. > > [continua qui: <https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/01/us/politics/elon-musk-doge-federal-payme…>] -- You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no Telegram)

Feb. 2, 2025

Elon Musk’s Team Now Has Full Access to Treasury’s Payments System

by Daniela Tafani

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave Mr. Musk’s representatives at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency a powerful tool to monitor and potentially limit government spending. By Andrew Duehren, Maggie Haberman, Theodore Schleifer and Alan Rappeport Feb. 1, 2025 Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave representatives of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency full access to the federal payment system late on Friday, according to three people familiar with the change, handing Elon Musk and the team he is leading a powerful tool to monitor and potentially limit government spending. The new authority follows a standoff this week with a top Treasury official who had resisted allowing Mr. Musk’s lieutenants into the department’s payment system, which sends out money on behalf of the entire federal government. The official, a career civil servant named David Lebryk, was put on leave and then suddenly retired on Friday after the dispute, according to people familiar with his exit. [...] The Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, is not a government department, but a team within the administration. It was put together at Mr. Trump’s direction by Mr. Musk to fan out across federal agencies seeking ways to cut spending, reduce the size of the federal work force and bring more efficiency to the bureaucracy. Most of those working on the initiative were recruited by Mr. Musk and his aides. Similar DOGE teams have begun demanding access to data and systems at other federal agencies, but none of those agencies control the flow of money in the way the Treasury Department does. Mr. Bessent granted access to the payments system to a handful of staff members affiliated with DOGE, including Tom Krause, the chief executive of a Silicon Valley company, Cloud Software Group, according to one of the people familiar with the change. Access to the system has historically been closely held because it includes sensitive personal information about the millions of Americans who receive Social Security checks, tax refunds and other payments from the federal government. A Treasury Department spokesman, a spokeswoman for DOGE and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a process typically run by civil servants, the Treasury Department carries out payments submitted by agencies across the government, disbursing more than $5 trillion in fiscal year 2023. Former officials said the onus was on individual agencies to ensure their payments are proper, not the relatively small staff at the Treasury Department, which is responsible for making more than one billion payments per year. Mr. Lebryk, the career Treasury official who retired on Friday, had resisted requests from members of Mr. Trump’s transition team for access to the data last month. After Mr. Trump took office, the White House indicated that he should be removed from the job and, according to a person familiar with the matter, Mr. Bessent suggested putting him on leave. [continua qui: <https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/01/us/politics/elon-musk-doge-federal-payme…>]

Feb. 2, 2025

GIG-ARTS Salerno 2025: Deadline extended to February 7

by Mauro SANTANIELLO

Due to multiple requests, we are pleased to announce that the deadline for abstract submissions for the GIG-ARTS Salerno 2025 Conference has been extended to February 7, 2025, at midnight CET. We invite authors to submit extended abstracts (maximum 500 words) outlining their research question(s), theoretical framework, approach and methodology, and expected findings or empirical outcome. All submissions will undergo a peer-review process. Submit your abstract here: https://conftool2025.gig-arts.eu/ Further information on the Conference here: https://gig-arts.eu/ *Main theme: “The rise of digital sovereignty: ambiguities and challenges.”* Key Dates: Notification to authors: 1 April 2025 Deadline for author registration: 14 April 2025 Programme publication: 20 April 2025 Registration deadline: 15 May 2025 Conference dates: 26-27 May 2025 We look forward to your contributions and hope to see you in Salerno! Best regards, The Organizing Committee GIG-ARTS SALERNO 2025

Jan. 31, 2025

Re: [nexa] "OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us"

by Alberto Cammozzo

Pare anche a me. Se capisco bene la vicenda DeepSeek per come si sta sviluppando finora mi pare che i chatbot e in generale gli LLM: 1) risulterebbero di difficile escludibilità, sia per il training (il modello può essere esfiltrato) che per il serving (può girare on-premises) che per i prompt (a meno di sistemi artificiosi [1]); 2) non seguono le economie di scala dei social network (gli utenti non hanno motivo di andare dove ci sono altri utenti). Non si sono viste nemmeno applicazioni di piattaforme già esistenti che godano sostanziali benefici dall'uso degli LLM. Di conseguenza mi pare che la monetizzabilità non possa seguire il facile modello di business del surveillance capitalism in copia carbone, e questo renderebbe dubbio il vantaggio a finanziare indiscriminatamente. In generale con queste premesse mi pare difficile la costruzione di un mercato vero e proprio attorno agli LLM. Prevedibilmente la ricerca si concentrerà sulla creazione di /copyright traps/ (analogamente a quanto faceva la defunta industria della cartografia [3]), /canary-tokens/ e /watermarking/ [2] ma tutto questo avrà i suoi inconvenienti e una certa incertezza giuridica, specie quando fosse dubbio l'uso legittimo del materiale originario per costruire il modello. Alberto [1] <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.06297> [2] <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.03824> [3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agloe,_New_York> On 31/01/25 10:14, Stefano Quintarelli via nexa wrote: > ma direi nemmeno concorrenza sleale. > solo violazione dei terms of service che pero' va capito se sono leciti > da qualche parte ho letto che deepseek avrebbe usato escamotage per > aggirare delle protezioni (rate limiting?) > forse cercano di buttarla sulla violazione di TPM, ma (IANAL) AFAIK > l'output di un LLM non è protetto da copyright a meno che non ci sia > un sostanziale contributo umano. > forse cercano che un giudice dica che c'e' ujn sostanziale contributo > umano nell'output degli LLM e quindi sono tuttelati e quindi deepseek > ha violato misure di protezione ? mi sembra un long shot > piu' FUD che altro > > On 30/01/25 22:31, GC F wrote: >> Se il claim è solo distillazione, così a occhio non può essere >> violazione di segreto industriale ma solo concorrenza sleale (magari >> mi sbaglio). Giusto anche l'articolo che ha postato Marco di Lemley. >> Le lagnanze di OpenAI sono comunque poco sostenibili. >> >> Giancarlo >> >> On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 8:52 PM Stefano Quintarelli >> <stefano(a)quintarelli.it <mailto:stefano@quintarelli.it>> wrote: >> >> non capisco la questione dataset riseptto alla distillazione >> puoi espandere, per piacere ? >> >> On 30/01/25 20:53, GC F wrote: >> > Immagino si lamentino di violazione di segreti industriali >> (teoricamente >> > il dataset può essere oggetto di protezione da SI) e competizione >> > sleale, non di violazione dei diritti autoriali di cui invece >> si è >> > discusso molto finora. >> > >> > Giancarlo >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 7:14 AM J.C. DE MARTIN >> > <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it >> <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it> >> <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it >> <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it>>> >> > wrote: >> > >> > __ >> > *OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data >> OpenAI Stole >> > From Us* >> > >> > /OpenAI shocked that an AI company would train on someone >> else's >> > data without permission or compensation./ >> > >> > Jason Koebler >> > >> > Jan 29, 2025 at 9:43 AM >> > >> > The narrative that OpenAI, Microsoft, and freshly minted >> White House >> > “AI czar” David Sacks are now pushing to explain why >> DeepSeek was >> > able to create a large language model that outpaces OpenAI’s >> while >> > spending orders of magnitude less money and using older >> chips is >> > that DeepSeek used OpenAI’s data unfairly and without >> compensation. >> > Sound familiar? >> > >> > Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that >> Microsoft >> > and OpenAI have been probing whether DeepSeek improperly >> trained the >> > R1 model that is taking the AI world by storm on the >> outputs of >> > OpenAI models. >> > >> > [...] >> > >> > continua qui: https://www.404media.co/openai-furious- >> deepseek-might- >> <https://www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-> >> > have-stolen-all-the-data-openai-stole-from-us/ <https:// >> > www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-have-stolen-all- >> the- <http://www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-have- >> stolen-all-the-> >> > data-openai-stole-from-us/> >> > >> >> -- You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no >> Telegram) >> >

Jan. 31, 2025

Re: [nexa] "OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us"

by Stefano Quintarelli

ma direi nemmeno concorrenza sleale. solo violazione dei terms of service che pero' va capito se sono leciti da qualche parte ho letto che deepseek avrebbe usato escamotage per aggirare delle protezioni (rate limiting?) forse cercano di buttarla sulla violazione di TPM, ma (IANAL) AFAIK l'output di un LLM non è protetto da copyright a meno che non ci sia un sostanziale contributo umano. forse cercano che un giudice dica che c'e' ujn sostanziale contributo umano nell'output degli LLM e quindi sono tuttelati e quindi deepseek ha violato misure di protezione ? mi sembra un long shot piu' FUD che altro On 30/01/25 22:31, GC F wrote: > Se il claim è solo distillazione, così a occhio non può essere > violazione di segreto industriale ma solo concorrenza sleale (magari mi > sbaglio). Giusto anche l'articolo che ha postato Marco di Lemley. Le > lagnanze di OpenAI sono comunque poco sostenibili. > > Giancarlo > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 8:52 PM Stefano Quintarelli > <stefano(a)quintarelli.it <mailto:stefano@quintarelli.it>> wrote: > > non capisco la questione dataset riseptto alla distillazione > puoi espandere, per piacere ? > > On 30/01/25 20:53, GC F wrote: > > Immagino si lamentino di violazione di segreti industriali > (teoricamente > > il dataset può essere oggetto di protezione da SI) e competizione > > sleale, non di violazione dei diritti autoriali di cui invece si è > > discusso molto finora. > > > > Giancarlo > > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 7:14 AM J.C. DE MARTIN > > <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it > <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it> > <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it > <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it>>> > > wrote: > > > > __ > > *OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data > OpenAI Stole > > From Us* > > > > /OpenAI shocked that an AI company would train on someone else's > > data without permission or compensation./ > > > > Jason Koebler > > > > Jan 29, 2025 at 9:43 AM > > > > The narrative that OpenAI, Microsoft, and freshly minted > White House > > “AI czar” David Sacks are now pushing to explain why DeepSeek was > > able to create a large language model that outpaces OpenAI’s > while > > spending orders of magnitude less money and using older chips is > > that DeepSeek used OpenAI’s data unfairly and without > compensation. > > Sound familiar? > > > > Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that > Microsoft > > and OpenAI have been probing whether DeepSeek improperly > trained the > > R1 model that is taking the AI world by storm on the outputs of > > OpenAI models. > > > > [...] > > > > continua qui: https://www.404media.co/openai-furious- > deepseek-might- <https://www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-> > > have-stolen-all-the-data-openai-stole-from-us/ <https:// > > www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-have-stolen-all- > the- <http://www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-have- > stolen-all-the-> > > data-openai-stole-from-us/> > > > > -- > You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no Telegram) > -- You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no Telegram)

Jan. 31, 2025

Re: [nexa] "OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us"

by GC F

Se il claim è solo distillazione, così a occhio non può essere violazione di segreto industriale ma solo concorrenza sleale (magari mi sbaglio). Giusto anche l'articolo che ha postato Marco di Lemley. Le lagnanze di OpenAI sono comunque poco sostenibili. Giancarlo On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 8:52 PM Stefano Quintarelli <stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: > non capisco la questione dataset riseptto alla distillazione > puoi espandere, per piacere ? > > On 30/01/25 20:53, GC F wrote: > > Immagino si lamentino di violazione di segreti industriali (teoricamente > > il dataset può essere oggetto di protezione da SI) e competizione > > sleale, non di violazione dei diritti autoriali di cui invece si è > > discusso molto finora. > > > > Giancarlo > > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 7:14 AM J.C. DE MARTIN > > <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it>> > > wrote: > > > > __ > > *OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole > > From Us* > > > > /OpenAI shocked that an AI company would train on someone else's > > data without permission or compensation./ > > > > Jason Koebler > > > > Jan 29, 2025 at 9:43 AM > > > > The narrative that OpenAI, Microsoft, and freshly minted White House > > “AI czar” David Sacks are now pushing to explain why DeepSeek was > > able to create a large language model that outpaces OpenAI’s while > > spending orders of magnitude less money and using older chips is > > that DeepSeek used OpenAI’s data unfairly and without compensation. > > Sound familiar? > > > > Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that Microsoft > > and OpenAI have been probing whether DeepSeek improperly trained the > > R1 model that is taking the AI world by storm on the outputs of > > OpenAI models. > > > > [...] > > > > continua qui: https://www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might- > > have-stolen-all-the-data-openai-stole-from-us/ <https:// > > www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-have-stolen-all-the- > > data-openai-stole-from-us/> > > > > -- > You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no Telegram) > >

Jan. 30, 2025

Re: [nexa] "OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us"

by Stefano Quintarelli

non capisco la questione dataset riseptto alla distillazione puoi espandere, per piacere ? On 30/01/25 20:53, GC F wrote: > Immagino si lamentino di violazione di segreti industriali (teoricamente > il dataset può essere oggetto di protezione da SI) e competizione > sleale, non di violazione dei diritti autoriali di cui invece si è > discusso molto finora. > > Giancarlo > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 7:14 AM J.C. DE MARTIN > <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it <mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it>> > wrote: > > __ > *OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole > From Us* > > /OpenAI shocked that an AI company would train on someone else's > data without permission or compensation./ > > Jason Koebler > > Jan 29, 2025 at 9:43 AM > > The narrative that OpenAI, Microsoft, and freshly minted White House > “AI czar” David Sacks are now pushing to explain why DeepSeek was > able to create a large language model that outpaces OpenAI’s while > spending orders of magnitude less money and using older chips is > that DeepSeek used OpenAI’s data unfairly and without compensation. > Sound familiar? > > Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that Microsoft > and OpenAI have been probing whether DeepSeek improperly trained the > R1 model that is taking the AI world by storm on the outputs of > OpenAI models. > > [...] > > continua qui: https://www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might- > have-stolen-all-the-data-openai-stole-from-us/ <https:// > www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-have-stolen-all-the- > data-openai-stole-from-us/> > -- You can reach me on Signal: @quinta.01 (no Whatsapp, no Telegram)

Jan. 30, 2025

R: "OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us"

by Marco Ricolfi

Per quanto Lemley, Mark A. and Henderson, Peter, The Mirage of Artificial Intelligence Terms of Use Restrictions (December 09, 2024). Princeton University Program in Law & Public Affairs Research Paper No. 2025-04, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5049562 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5049562<https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5049562> suggerirebbe che TS non ci possa essere (almeno come ToU) [cid:image001.jpg@01DB735E.82AC4690] __________________________________________ Prof. Avv. Marco Ricolfi C.so Galileo Ferraris, 43 - 10128 Torino T (+39) 011.554.54.11 F (+39) 011.518.45.87 E marco.ricolfi(a)weigmann.it<mailto:marco.ricolfi@weigmann.it> PEC marcoricolfi(a)pec.ordineavvocatitorino.it<mailto:marcoricolfi@pec.ordineavvocatitorino.it> www.weigmann.it<https://urlsand.esvalabs.com/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.weigmann.it%2F&e=6b170c62&…> [cid:image002.jpg@01DB735E.82AC4690] Member of The Parlex Group of European Lawyers EEIG with associated law firms in the main capitals of the European Union, U.S.A., Israel and Malaysia; web site: www.parlex.org<https://urlsand.esvalabs.com/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parlex.org%2F&e=6b170c62&h…> DISCLAIMER: Le informazioni contenute in questa comunicazione sono riservate e destinate esclusivamente alla/e persona/e o all'ente/i destinatario. È vietato a soggetti diversi dai destinatari di questa comunicazione qualsiasi uso, copia o diffusione delle informazioni e dei dati in essa contenuti, sia ai sensi dell'art. 616 c.p. sia ai sensi del Regolamento (UE) 2016/679. Se questa comunicazione Vi è pervenuta per errore, Vi preghiamo di informarci chiamando il numero (+39) 011.554.54.11, ovvero di rispondere a questa e-mail e successivamente, di cancellare dal Vostro sistema la e-mail ed ogni suo allegato. DISCLAIMER: The information contained in the e-mail is confidential and intended only for the attention of the named individual(s) or organisation(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any use, copying or distribution of the information contained herein is prohibited pursuant to Article 616 of the Italian Penal Code and (EU) Regulation 2016/679. If the communication has been sent to you in error, please notify us by telephone on (+39) 011.554.54.11, or reply to the e-mail. Please then delete the e-mail and any attachments from your system. Da: nexa <nexa-bounces(a)server-nexa.polito.it> Per conto di GC F Inviato: giovedì 30 gennaio 2025 20:53 A: Nexa <nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it> Oggetto: Re: [nexa] "OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us" Immagino si lamentino di violazione di segreti industriali (teoricamente il dataset può essere oggetto di protezione da SI) e competizione sleale, non di violazione dei diritti autoriali di cui invece si è discusso molto finora. Giancarlo On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 7:14 AM J.C. DE MARTIN <juancarlos.demartin(a)polito.it<mailto:juancarlos.demartin@polito.it>> wrote: OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us OpenAI shocked that an AI company would train on someone else's data without permission or compensation. Jason Koebler Jan 29, 2025 at 9:43 AM The narrative that OpenAI, Microsoft, and freshly minted White House “AI czar” David Sacks are now pushing to explain why DeepSeek was able to create a large language model that outpaces OpenAI’s while spending orders of magnitude less money and using older chips is that DeepSeek used OpenAI’s data unfairly and without compensation. Sound familiar? Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that Microsoft and OpenAI have been probing whether DeepSeek improperly trained the R1 model that is taking the AI world by storm on the outputs of OpenAI models. [...] continua qui: https://www.404media.co/openai-furious-deepseek-might-have-stolen-all-the-d…<https://url.de.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/phj8CWPxMXTGp0Gf6fWSokAg4?domain=404…>

Jan. 30, 2025