• Star@sopuli.xyzOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It’s so ridiculous when corporations steal everyone’s work for their own profit, no one bats an eye but when a group of individuals do the same to make education and knowledge free for everyone it’s somehow illegal, unethical, immoral and what not.

    • Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Using publically available data to train isn’t stealing.

      Daily reminder that the ones pushing this narrative are literally corporation like OpenAI. If you can’t use copyright materials freely to train on, it brings up the cost in such a way that only a handful of companies can afford the data.

      They want to kill the open-source scene and are manipulating you to do so. Don’t build their moat for them.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        And using publicly available data to train gets you a shitty chatbot…

        Hell, even using copyrighted data to train isn’t that great.

        Like, what do you even think they’re doing here for your conspiracy?

        You think OpenAI is saying they should pay for the data? They’re trying to use it for free.

        Was this a meta joke and you had a chatbot write your comment?

        • tourist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Was this a meta joke and you had a chatbot write your comment?

          if someone said this to me I’d cry

        • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The point that was being made was that public available data includes a whole lot amount of copyrighted data to begin with and its pretty much impossible to filter it out. Grand example, the Eiffel tower in Paris is not copyright protected, but the lights on it are so you can only using pictures of the Eiffel tower during the day, if the picture itself isn’t copyright protected by the original photographer. Copyright law has all these complex caveat and exception that make it impossible to tell in glance whether or not it is protected.

          This in turn means, if AI cannot legally train on copyrighted materials it finds online without paying huge sums of money then effectively only mega corporation who can pay copyright fines as cost of business will be able to afford training decent AI.

          The only other option to produce any ai of such type is a very narrow curated set of known materials with a public use license but that is not going to get you anything competent on its own.

          EDIT: In case it isn’t clear i am clarifying what i understood from Grimy@lemmy.world comment, not adding to it.

          • RainfallSonata@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I didn’t want any of this shit. IDGAF if we don’t have AI. I’m still not sure the internet actually improved anything, let alone what the benefits of AI are supposed to be.