• rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Okay, I can work with this. Hey Altman you can train on anything that’s public domain, now go take those fuck ton of billions and fight the copyright laws to make public domain make sense again.

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Counter counterpoint: I don’t know, I think making an exception for tech companies probably gives a minor advantage to consumers at least.

        You can still go to copilot and ask it for some pretty fucking off the wall python and bash, it’ll save you a good 20 minutes of writing something and it’ll already be documented and generally best practice.

        Sure the tech companies are the one walking away with billions of dollars and it presumably hurts the content creators and copyright holders.

        The problem is, feeding AI is not significantly different than feeding Google back in the day. You remember back when you could see cached versions of web pages. And hell their book scanning initiative to this day is super fucking useful.

        If you look at how we teach and train artists. And then how those artists do their work. All digital art and most painting these days has reference art all over the place. AI is taking random noise and slowly making things look more like the reference art that’s not wholly different than what people are doing.

        We’re training AI on every book that people can get their hands on, But that’s how we train people too.

        I say that training an AI is not that different than training people, and the entire content of all the copyright they look at in their lives doesn’t get a chunk of the money when they write a book or paint something that looks like the style of Van Gogh. They’re even allowed to generate content for private companies or for sale.

        What is different, is that the AI is very good at this and has machine levels of retention and abilities. And companies are poised to get rich off of the computational work. So I’m actually perfectly down with AI’s being trained on copyrighted materials as long as they can’t recite it directly and in whole, But I feel the models that are created using these techniques should also be in the public domain.

        • melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          giving an exception to tech companies gives an advantage to consumers

          No. shut the fuck up. these companies are anti human and only exist to threaten labor and run out the clock on climate change so we all die without a revolution and the billionaires flee to the bunkers they’re convinced will save them (they won’t, closed systems are doomed). it’s an existential threat. yudkowsky, of all fucking people, is correct, if for entirely wrong nonsense reasons.

          good for writing code

          so, I have tried to use it for that. nothing I have ever asked it for was remotely fit for purpose, often referring to things like libraries that straight up do not exist. it might be fine if it can quote a long thing from stack exchange from a program anyone who’s been coding for a decade has ten versions of laying around in their home folder, but if you want a piece of code that does something particular, it’s worse than useless. not even as a guide.

          AI

          HOLY SHIT WE HAVE AI NOW!? WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN!? can I talk to it? or do you just mean large language models?

          there’s some benefit in these things regurgitating art

          tell me you don’t understand a single thing about how these models work, and don’t understand a single thing about the value meaning or utility of art, without saying “I don’t understand a single thing about how these models work, and don’t understand a single thing about the value meaning or utility of art.”.

    • meathappening@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      This is the correct answer. Never forget that US copyright law originally allowed for a 14 year (renewable for 14 more years) term. Now copyright holders are able to:

      • reach consumers more quickly and easily using the internet
      • market on more fronts (merch didn’t exist in 1710)
      • form other business types to better hold/manage IP

      So much in the modern world exists to enable copyright holders, but terms are longer than ever. It’s insane.

  • RandomVideos@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    I feel like it would be ok if AI generated images/text would be clearly marked(but i dont think its possible in the case of text)

    Who would support something made stealing the hard work of other people if they could tell instantly

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Please let it be over, yes.

    Nobody even tries to write code from scratch anymore. I think it will have a lot of negative effects on programmers over time.

  • NewOldGuard@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days 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

      • droplet6585@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        They monetize it, erase authorship and bastardize the work.

        Like if copyright was to protect against anything, it would be this.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days 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
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days 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.