this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
784 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

66353 readers
6841 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] liquidthex@reddthat.com 3 points 2 hours ago

It's so wild how laws just have no idea what to do with you if you just add one layer of proxy. "Nooo I'm not stealing and plagerizing, it's the AI doing it!"

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 hours ago

If I'm using "AI" to generate subtitles for the "community" is ok if i have a large "datastore" of "licensable media" stored locally to work off of right?

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 22 points 4 hours ago

Good.

Fuck Sam Altman's greed. Pay the fucking artists you're robbing.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 53 points 5 hours ago

So pirating full works for commercial use suddenly is "fair use", or what? Lets see what e.g. Disney says about this.

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 19 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

What if we had taken the billions of dollars invested in AI and invested that into public education instead?

Imagine the return on investment of the information being used to train actual humans who can reason and don’t lie 60% of the time instead of using it to train a computer that is useless more than it is useful.

[–] pogmommy@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 hours ago

But you have to pay humans, and give them bathroom breaks, and allow them time off work to spend with their loved ones. Where's the profit in that? Surely it's more clever and efficient to shovel time and money into replacing something that will never be able to practically develop beyond current human understanding. After all, we're living in the golden age of humanity and history has ended! No new knowledge will ever be made so let's just make machines that regurgitate our infallible and complete knowledge.

[–] Daelsky@lemmy.ca 27 points 4 hours ago

Where are the copyright lawsuits by Nintendo and Disney when you need them lol

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 28 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

So pirating full works suddenly is fair use, or what?

[–] BleatingZombie@lemmy.world 11 points 4 hours ago

Only if you're doing it to learn, I guess

Wait until all those expensive scientific journals hear about this

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

If your business model only works if you break the Law, that mean's you're just another Organised Crime group.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

Organized crime exists to make money; the way OpenAI is burning through it, they're more Disorganized Crime

[–] stopforgettingit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

God forbid you offer to PAY for access to works that people create like everyone else has to. University students have to pay out the nose for their books that they "train" on, why can't billion dollar AI companies?

[–] thann@lemmy.dbzer0.com 64 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Slave owners might go broke after abolition? 😂

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 17 points 5 hours ago

If everyone can 'train' themselves on copyrighted works, then I say "fair game.''

Otherwise, get fucked.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 97 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Training that AI is absolutely fair use.

Selling that AI service that was trained on copyrighted material is absolutely not fair use.

[–] deltapi@lemmy.world 12 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Agreed... although I would go a step further and say distributing the LLM model or the results of use (even if done without cost) is not fair use, as the training materials weren't licensed.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 hours ago

Ultimatelly it's "Doing Research that advances knowledge for everybody" that should be allowed free use of copyrighted materials, whils activities for direct or indirect commercial gains (included Research whose results are Patented and then licensed for a fee) should not, IMHO.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 16 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!

What is the charge, officer? Eating a meal? A succulent Chinese meal?

[–] patrick@lemmy.bestiver.se 5 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

I don’t think they’re wrong in saying that if they aren’t allowed to train on copyrighted works then they will fall behind. Maybe I missed it in the article, but Japan for example has that exact law (use of copyright to train generative AI is allowed).

Personally I think we need to give them somewhat of an out by letting them do it but then taxing the fuck out of the resulting product. “You can use copyrighted works for training but then 50% of your profits are taxed”. Basically a recognition that the sum of all copyrighted works is a societal good and not just an individual copyright holders.

https://jackson.dev/post/generative-ai-and-copyright/

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

50% is too little if you want to allow that

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 106 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (4 children)

Fine by me. Can it be over today?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Konstant@lemmy.world 11 points 5 hours ago

Suddenly millions of people are downloading to "train their AI models".

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 2 hours ago

They are US based right?

So they literally do whatever they want anyway regardless of what any law might say.

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 16 points 5 hours ago

Come on bro, let us pirate bro, just one more ngram of books bro

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

Why does Sam keep threatening us with a good time?

[–] Jericho_One@lemmy.world 14 points 6 hours ago
[–] febra@lemmy.world 27 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

If artificial intelligence can be trained on stolen information, then so should be "natural" intelligence.

Oh, wait. One is owned by oligarchs raking in billions, the other just serves the plebs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

National security my ass. More like his time span to show more dumb "achievements" while getting richer depends on it and nothing else

[–] Horrabin@programming.dev 6 points 4 hours ago

This sounds like socialism is good for capitalists

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 72 points 8 hours ago

Come on guys, his company is only worth $157 billion.

Of course he can't pay for content he needs for his automated bullshit machine. He's not made of money!

[–] kipo@lemm.ee 16 points 6 hours ago
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›