this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1215 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

66584 readers
4129 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 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SaladKing@lemm.ee 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is exactly what social media companies have been doing for a while (it’s free, yes) they use your data to train their algorithms to squeeze more money out of people. They get a tangible and monetary benefit from our collective data. These AI companies want to train their AI on our hard work and then get monetary benefit off of it. How is this not seen as theft or even if they are not doing it just yet…how is it not seen as an attempt at theft?

How come people (not the tech savvy) are unable to see how they are being exploited? These companies are not currently working towards any UBI bills or policies in governments that I am aware of. Since they want to take our work, and use it to get rich and their investors rich why do they think they are justified in using people’s work? It just seems so slime-y.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 2 days ago (3 children)

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

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago

Good.

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

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 72 points 2 days ago (16 children)

Sam Altman is a grifter, but on this topic he is right.

The reality is, that IP laws in their current form hamper innovation and technological development. Stephan Kinsella has written on this topic for the past 25 years or so and has argued to reform the system.

Here in the Netherlands, we know that it's true. Philips became a great company because they could produce lightbulbs here, which were patented in the UK. We also had a booming margarine business, because we weren't respecting British and French patents and that business laid the foundation for what became Unilever.

And now China is using those exact same tactics to build up their industry. And it gives them a huge competitive advantage.

A good reform would be to revert back to the way copyright and patent law were originally developed, with much shorter terms and requiring a significant fee for a one time extension.

The current terms, lobbied by Disney, are way too restrictive.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] MisterOwl@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Oh no anyway.jpg

[–] febra@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days 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)
[–] stopforgettingit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days 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?

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 75 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Good if AI fails because it can't abuse copyright. Fuck AI.

*except the stuff used for science that isn't trained on copyrighted scraped data, that use is fine

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RejZoR@lemmy.ml 52 points 2 days ago (10 children)

That's like calling stealing from shops essential for my existence and it would be "over" for me if they stop me. The shit these clowns say is just astounding. It's like they have no morals and no self awareness and awareness for people around them.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 days ago

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

Otherwise, get fucked.

[–] barnaclebutt@lemmy.world 35 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 8 points 1 day ago

No, actually they've just finally admitted that they can't improve them any further because there's not enough training data in existence to squeeze any more demonizing returns out of.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›