Post

@lina it's bad but this is real, copyright is not a unique viable way to protect your work.

After all, any license is only as powerful as it is capable of being enforced by legal means.

Now the only diference is we have a powerfull way to do it in large scale and make it difficult, even. impossible to prove tat be ethical.

Sadly copyright era is over

@lina There’s no money in that.

AI is a wealth extraction tool. Any other utility is inconsequential to that goal.

@lina even with models where the datasets are open they train on synthetic data from proprietary models which I'd argue launders all the problems with them...

@lina They are. I worked somewhere that had a model trained on the (large, complex) system's documentation. Often it knew the answer (with a link to the source document), sometimes it didn't know the answer in which case it would say so (with links to possibly relevant source documents).

@lina the psycho billionaires can't sell the idea of "ai will change the world and replace workers and bring infinite wisdom" idea to investors like that

it's sad, the unethical ai industry needs to collapse so they get a reality check

@lina because noone gives you money for it and it is not actually that useful. The reason the LLM like ChatGPT "works" is not because they are useful. It is because they feel like Her to the humans. This is partially due to their training but also how they are presented and what they do. Generic chatting.

If you make them specific, then you lose the AGI look and feel. And that destroy the main value... Which is the look and feel of massive growth.

We will probably do it, but in a few years. Once the mania calm down.

@lina i dont think the developers care for credibility and at least right now it does not sell well to have a "worse" model but good morals.. Which saddens me

@Kensan Haha no that one is web scraped and only supposedly respects "opt out". Copyright doesn't let you take whatever you want unless the person you took it from asks you to stop, that's not how it works.

E.g. my website doesn't have AI UAs blocked in robots.txt therefore they consider themselves free to use my data. I did not consent to that. Lack of opt out is not consent.

This is even more problematic with UGC where users can't even opt out if they don't control the robots.txt file. Honestly that entire approach is a farce, I have no idea how anyone takes the ethics of this model seriously.