• fartsparkles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    If this passes, piracy websites can rebrand as AI training material websites and we can all run a crappy model locally to train on pirated material.

  • NewOldGuard@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Oh no not the plagiarism machine however would we recover???

    Please fail and die openai thx

    Also copyright is bullshit and IP shouldn’t exist especially for corporate entities. Free sharing of human knowledge and creativity should be a right. Machine plagiarism to create uninspired mimicries isn’t a necessary part of that process and should be regulated heavily

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        No it’s not.

        It can be problematic behaviour, you can make it illegal if you want, but at a fundamental level, making a copy of something is not the same thing as stealing something.

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          it uses the result of your labor without compensation. it’s not theft of the copyrighted material. it’s theft of the payment.

          it’s different from piracy in that piracy doesn’t equate to lost sales. someone who pirates a song or game probably does so because they wouldn’t buy it otherwise. either they can’t afford or they don’t find it worth doing so. so if they couldn’t pirate it, they still wouldn’t buy it.

          but this is a company using labor without paying you, something that they otherwise definitely have to do. he literally says it would be over if they couldn’t get this data. they just don’t want to pay for it.

        • kibiz0r@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Also true. It’s scraping.

          In the words of Cory Doctorow:

          Web-scraping is good, actually.

          Scraping against the wishes of the scraped is good, actually.

          Scraping when the scrapee suffers as a result of your scraping is good, actually.

          Scraping to train machine-learning models is good, actually.

          Scraping to violate the public’s privacy is bad, actually.

          Scraping to alienate creative workers’ labor is bad, actually.

          We absolutely can have the benefits of scraping without letting AI companies destroy our jobs and our privacy. We just have to stop letting them define the debate.

          • Grumuk@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Molly White also wrote about this in the context of open access on the web and people being concerned about how their works are being used.

            “Wait, not like that”: Free and open access in the age of generative AI

            The same thing happened again with the explosion of generative AI companies training models on CC-licensed works, and some were disappointed to see the group take the stance that, not only do CC licenses not prohibit AI training wholesale, AI training should be considered non-infringing by default from a copyright perspective.

          • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Our privacy was long gone well before AI companies were even founded, if people cared about their privacy then none of the largest tech companies would exist because they all spy on you wholesale.

            The ship has sailed on generating digital assets. This isn’t a technology that can be invented. Digital artists will have to adapt.

            Technology often disrupts jobs, you can’t fix that by fighting the technology. It’s already invented. You fight the disruption by ensuring that your country takes care of people who lose their jobs by providing them with support and resources to adapt to the new job landscape.

            For example, we didn’t stop electronic computers to save the job of Computer (a large field of highly trained humans who did calculations) and CAD destroyed the drafting profession. Digital artists are not the first to experience this and they won’t be the last.

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Our privacy was long gone well before AI companies were even founded, if people cared about their privacy then none of the largest tech companies would exist because they all spy on you wholesale.

              In the US. The EU has proven that you can have perfectly functional privacy laws.

              If your reasoning is based o the US not regulating their companies and so that makes it impossible to regulate them, then your reasoning is bad.

              • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                My reasoning is based upon observing the current Internet from the perspective of working in cyber security and dealing with privacy issues for global clients.

                The GDPR is a step in the right direction, but it doesn’t guarantee your digital privacy. It’s more of a framework to regulate the trading and collecting of your personal data, not to prevent it.

                No matter who or where you are, your data is collected and collated into profiles which are traded between data brokers. Anonymized data is a myth, it’s easily deanonymized by data brokers and data retention limits do essentially nothing.

                AI didn’t steal your privacy. Advertisers and other data consuming entities have structured the entire digital and consumer electronics ecosystem to spy on you decades before transformers or even deep networks were ever used.

  • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Fuck Sam Altmann, the fartsniffer who convinced himself & a few other dumb people that his company really has the leverage to make such demands.

    “Oh, but democracy!” - saying that in the US of 2025 is a whole 'nother kind of dumb.
    Anyhow, you don’t give a single fuck about democracy, you’re just scared because a chinese company offers what you offer for a fraction of the price/resources.

    Your scared for your government money and basically begging for one more handout “to save democracy”.

    Yes, I’ve been listening to Ed Zitron.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      gosh Ed Zitron is such an anodyne voice to hear, I felt like I was losing my mind until I listened to some of his stuff

      • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, he has the ability to articulate what I was already thinking about LLMs and bring in hard data to back up his thesis that it’s all bullshit. Dangerous and expensive bullshit, but bullshit nonetheless.

        It’s really sad that his willingness to say the tech industry is full of shit is such an unusual attribute in the tech journalism world.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      It seems like their message was written specifically for the biases the current administration holds. Calling China PRC is an obvious example. So it was written by idiots for idiots apparently.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is a tough one

    Open-ai is full of shit and should die but then again, so should copyright law as it currently is

    • meathappening@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      That’s fair, but OpenAI isn’t fighting to reform copyright law for everyone. OpenAI wants you to be subject to the same restrictions you currently face, and them to be exempt. This isn’t really an “enemy of my enemy” situation.

    • turnip@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Sam Altman hasn’t complained surprisingly, he just said there’s competition and it will be harder for OpenAI to compete with open source. I think their small lead is essentially gone, and their plan is now to suckle Microsoft’s teet.

  • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Getting really tired of these fucking CEOs calling their failing businesses “threats to national security” so big daddy government will come and float them again. Doubly ironic its coming from a company whos actually destroying the fucking planet while it achieves fuck-all.