• febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 hours ago

    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.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 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!

  • flop_leash_973@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Sounds like another way of saying “there actually isn’t a profitable business in this.”

    But since we live in crazy world, once he gets his exemption to copyright laws for AI, someone needs to come up with a good self hosted AI toolset that makes it legal for the average person to pirate stuff at scale as well.

  • Geodad@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I mean, if they are allowed to go forward then we should be allowed to freely pirate as well.

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Don’t worry: the law will be very carefully crafted so that it will be legal only if they do it, not us.

      • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Yeah, you can train your own neural network on pirated content, all right, but you better not enjoy that content at the same time or have any feelings while watching it, because that’s not covered by “training”.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I need a seamstress AI to take over 10 million seamstress robots so I don’t have to pay 100million seamstresses for fruit of the loom underwear… Could you tech it how to do double well and then back up at each end with some zigzags? For free? I mean everyone knows zigzag!

  • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    I hope generative AI obliterates copyright. I hope that its destruction is so thorough that we either forget it ever existed or we talk about it in disgust as something that only existed in stupider times.

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Thing is that copywrite did serve a purpose and was for like 20 years before disney got it extended to the nth degree. The idea was the authors had a chance to make money but were expected to be prolific enough to have more writings by the time 20 years was over. I would like to see with patents that once you get one you have a limited time to go to market. Maybe 10 years and if you product is ever not available for purchase (at a cost equivalent to the average cost accounted for inflation or something) you lose the patent so others can produce it. So like stop making an attachment for a product and now anyone can.

    • patatahooligan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I find that very unlikely to happen. If AI is accepted as fair use by the legal system, then that means they have a motive to keep copyright as restrictive as possible; it protects their work but allows them to use every one else’s. If you hate copyright (and you should) AI is probably your enemy, not your ally.

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Interesting take. I’m not opposed, but I feel like the necessary reverse engineering skill base won’t ramp up enough to deal with SAS and holomorphic encryption. So, in a world without copyright, you might be able to analog hole whatever non-interactibe media you want, but software piracy will be rendered impossible at the end of the escalation of hostilities.

      Copyright is an unnatural, authoritarian-imposed monopoly. I doubt it will last forever.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Copyright is a good idea. It was just stretched beyond all reasonable expectations. Copyright should work like Patents. 15 years. You get one, and only one, 15 year extension. At either the 15 or 30 year mark, the work enters the public domain.

  • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    That sounds like a you problem.

    “Our business is so bad and barely viable that it can only survive if you allow us to be overly unethical”, great pitch guys.

    I mean that’s like arguing “our economy is based on slave plantations! If you abolish the practice, you’ll destroy our nation!”

  • graff@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    6 hours ago

    If training an ai on copyrighted material is fair use, then piracy is archiving

  • barnaclebutt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Look we may have driven Aaron Swartz to suicide for doing basically the same thing on a smaller scale, but dammit we are getting very rich of this. And, if we are getting rich, then it is okay to break the law while actively fucking over actually creative people. Trust us. We are tech bros and we know what is best for you is for us to become incredibly rich and out of touch. You need us.

    • AnAmericanPotato@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 hours ago

      In case anyone is unfamiliar, Aaron Swartz downloaded a bunch of academic journals from JSTOR. This wasn’t for training AI, though. Swartz was an advocate for open access to scientific knowledge. Many papers are “open access” and yet are not readily available to the public.

      Much of what he downloaded was open-access, and he had legitimate access to the system via his university affiliation. The entire case was a sham. They charged him with wire fraud, unauthorized access to a computer system, breaking and entering, and a host of other trumped-up charges, because he…opened an unlocked closet door and used an ethernet jack from there. The fucking Secret Service was involved.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz#Arrest_and_prosecution

      The federal prosecution involved what was characterized by numerous critics (such as former Nixon White House counsel John Dean) as an “overcharging” 13-count indictment and “overzealous”, “Nixonian” prosecution for alleged computer crimes, brought by then U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz.

      Nothing Swartz did is anywhere close to the abuse by OpenAI, Meta, etc., who openly admit they pirated all their shit.

      • barnaclebutt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        You’re correct that their piracy was on a much more egregious scale than what Aaron did, but they don’t openly admit to their piracy. Meta just argued that it isn’t piracy because they didn’t seed.

        Edit: to be clear. I don’t think that Aaron Swartz did anything wrong. Unlike the chatGPT, meta, etc.