this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1170 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

73534 readers
2484 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 news or articles.
  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
[–] graff@lemm.ee 24 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

Good.

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

[–] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago (3 children)

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I have conflicting feelings about this whole thing. If you are selling the result of training like OpenAI does (and every other company), then I feel like it’s absolutely and clearly not fair use. It’s just theft with extra steps.

On the other hand, what about open source projects and individuals who aren’t selling or competing with the owners of the training material? I feel like that would be fair use.

What keeps me up at night is if training is never fair use, then the natural result is that AI becomes monopolized by big companies with deep pockets who can pay for an infinite amount of random content licensing, and then we are all forever at their mercy for this entire branch of technology.

The practical, socioeconomic, and ethical considerations are really complex, but all I ever see discussed are these hard-line binary stances that would only have awful corporate-empowering consequences, either because they can steal content freely or because they are the only ones that will have the resources to control the technology.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Good, end this AI bullshit, it has little upsides and a metric fuckton of downsides for the common man

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 20 points 4 months ago

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

Otherwise, get fucked.

[–] F_OFF_Reddit@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago

No amigo, it's not fair if you're profiting from it in the long run.

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] chairsushi@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 4 months ago

Then let it be over then.

[–] criss_cross@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So Deepmind is good to train on your models then right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kipo@lemm.ee 18 points 4 months ago
[–] Zier@fedia.io 16 points 4 months ago (7 children)

If AI gets to use copyrighted material for free and makes a profit off of the results, that means piracy is 1000% Legal. Excuse me while I go and download a car!!

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!

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

[–] Jericho_One@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago
[–] Ferroto@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago

Good. Fuck AI

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

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 14 points 4 months ago

But if you stop me from criming, how will I get better at crime!?!

[–] HalfSalesman@lemm.ee 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (8 children)

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 12 points 4 months ago (4 children)

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Oops, oh well. I very much hope it's over, asshole.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Konstant@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

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

[–] LonstedBrowryBased@lemm.ee 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Good riddance. This version of AI is just a glorified search engine anyways

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Technofascism on its way to legalize my 30TB trove of backups

[–] faberyayo@lemm.ee 13 points 4 months ago

Fuck OpenAI for stealing the hard work of millions of people

[–] shaggyb@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

"How am I supposed to make any money if I can't steal all of my products to sell back to the world that produced them?"

Yeah, fuck that. The whole industry deserves to die.

[–] chaosCruiser@futurology.today 13 points 4 months ago (16 children)

How many pages has a human author read and written before they can produce something worth publishing? I’m pretty sure that’s not even a million pages. Why does an AI require a gazillion pages to learn, but the quality is still unimpressive? I think there’s something fundamentally wrong with the way we teach these models.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] uis@lemm.ee 12 points 4 months ago

Vote pirate party.

[–] HighFructoseLowStand@lemm.ee 12 points 4 months ago

Okay.

It was fun while it lasted.

For someone.

I presume.

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 months 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?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›