this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2025
229 points (99.6% liked)
Privacy
2358 readers
188 users here now
Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Of course not. No "stealing" is happening. People are posting content on an open protocol that permits anyone to read it. Exactly as intended.
If you do not want to be heard then yes, I suppose you could stay silent. That would indeed accomplish that.
You could also find a social media platform whose content is locked behind a walled garden of some sort that makes it more difficult for your posts to be seen by the public. But that's antithetical to how the Fediverse works, you want someplace very different from here if that's how you want to approach this.
Basically, you are on a platform that's specifically designed to broadcast your comments far and wide without restriction, and then you're getting upset that someone you didn't want to hear your comments is hearing your comments. I'm not sure what you expected.
Participating in a public forum that has no technical way of preventing data from being used by a particular class of actor does not preclude having an opinion that a particular class of actor should have rules about what data they are allowed to use.
People can have whatever opinions they want to have. In this case that opinion flies in the face of obvious reality and I'm pointing that out.
It's like trying to drive your car across the Atlantic ocean and then griping about how the car failed to stay above the water because you really thought it should be able to handle that.
It doesn't matter how many pithy analogies you make. You need to recognize the difference between "I know they're scraping this website because they can" and "I don't think they should be allowed to scrape this website". You're arguing that they're incompatible when they're not.
As I said, people can have whatever opinion they want. Reality is under no obligation to respect those opinions.
Analogies are merely explanatory.
If you understand, then you should be able to understand that your "they were dressed like they wanted it" level argument bullshit is completely unnecessary.
Ah, the "people who disagree with me are supporting rape" argument, how classy.
It's not that they're "dressed like they wanted it." The ActivityPub protocol explicitly and deliberately does this. If you post a comment on a Fediverse community then by design that comment is going to be broadcast to every instance with a subscription and displayed in public to anyone who wants to see it. That's what the protocol is for. There should be no misunderstanding or misinterpretation here.
Ok? That doesn't mean that everyone has to agree that AI companies should be allowed to train on the data. Are you seriously so dense you can't distinguish between technology and social issues?
Ps: I very obviously didn't say you support rape, but drew the very obvious comparison to what you're saying. Use your head for 2 seconds.
It means that people should not be surprised that AI companies are training on their data. They're deliberately putting their content out into the world where AI trainers can read it in an uncontrolled manner, and reading it is all that's needed for AI training.
There have already been a number of lawsuits about AI training and thus far nothing seems to indicate that it's something that copyright restricts. If you know of any cases that have established otherwise I suppose feel free to link them, but until then there's nothing illegal going on here.
If you just want to be angry about it then I suppose there's nothing stopping you on that count. Go ahead.
It isn't about what is currently legal under the law! People can discuss how they would prefer society works, and should! This is what was happening in this thread and that's why you trying to shove your "well actually this system is federated and it's not illegal" is pointless and unwanted. You're not bringing anything to the conversation because you can't even tell what the conversation is about, apparently.
There was someone else in this thread responding to me that didn't understand how ActivityPub or the law worked, my explanations certainly were not "pointless" for them. They could have learned some things from what I said. Whether they did or not, who knows, that's up to them.
You don't get to decide what the conversation is about, it's a collaborative thing. All that OP opened with is "look, Facebook is training AIs off of Fediverse content" and I responded to that with my own take on what this meant. My comments have been on-topic and haven't broken any instance or community rules that I can see.
Feel free to not respond to my comments, or even to block me if you really prefer not to see what I have to say. User blocks are better implemented on the Fediverse than back on Reddit, they don't wreck the flow of conversation for everyone else so they're a better option here.
You opened by saying that somehow, using a federated social media site naturally means someone also supports using that site to train AI. My whole point in this entire thread is that you are drawing a false conclusion, clearly, because there are plenty of people that clearly don't agree.
You just spew the same unrelated junk over and over because you can't back up your ridiculous assertion.
I don't see any point in continuing because you're clearly tripling down, but you really should actually respond to what is actually being said to you if you're going to respond at all.
I was being sarcastic. It just boggles me that people are surprised by this, it should be obvious that the Fediverse is an even better source of training material (in practical terms if not in volume) than Reddit and such because there are no API restrictions or big corporations willing to throw lawsuits around.
If you don't want your posts and comments to be used to train AI then posting on the Fediverse is the very last thing you should be doing.