334
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 150 points 1 week ago

Cool so we can just make up our own rules now. Well, all Microsoft products are freeware now because the same reason this guy

[-] [email protected] 78 points 1 week ago

Windows XP code was leaked 2 years ago, so it's freeware according to this idi... stable genius .

[-] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

Ok.. so from now on .. when I see a "repackaged" Microsoft product that for some reason.. which I don't care to know... doesn't ask for a payment.. I can use it without restrictions ?!! that's really nice of you Microsoft ... thank you.

[-] [email protected] 109 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You heard it here folks. Microsoft says if you find something online, it's free.

[-] Bakkoda 3 points 6 days ago

Always was.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Which is why I boycott as hard as I can every service this evil corporation provides (migrate your MS GitHub project away now so I can delete this account too)

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Microsoft is in a death spiral.

Even my coworkers who are complete idiots with technology, who actively sabotage themselves every time they touch any piece of hardware and software, have soured entirely on nearly every Microsoft product across the board.

Its funny how quickly people change their minds when they dont understand the technology on a deeper level. Its just: "this is frustrating now I hate it" and no further thought.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

@Rekorse @toastal They just reach the same point as professionals, only 10 years later (+/- 2 years)

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

@JCreazy @sabreW4K3 I have found a key for windows 11 together with its source code that means that its free now right? :ablobcatreach:

[-] [email protected] 105 points 1 week ago

Fair, then everything I can find on the Internet must be freeware too. Set the sails, matey!

[-] [email protected] 66 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No officer, this is not a pirated movie. It's generated by an AI model I created and trained with data from the internet and the fact that it's 99% identical to an existing movie is irrelevant.

[-] [email protected] 36 points 1 week ago

my AI is so good, it generated one that’s 100% identical

plus my AI uses less than 99% of the electricity of Microsoft’s

[-] [email protected] 23 points 1 week ago

Can I just call lossy compression AI and use this as a defense?

[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

It is an algorithm... So yes.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Also, this ground breaking AI model I made to do this was umm accidentally erased and I also forgot how to do make it.

Jury: “seems reasonable”

[-] [email protected] 82 points 1 week ago

As one person on Mastodon said, "AI is a toxic industry created by toxic people with toxic ideals".

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

I wouldn't go that far. As it turns out AI is a buzz word and buzz words have little meaning

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Yea I thought about that too. But apparently some people find "AI" useful.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

If an LLM can save me 30 minutes writing nice emails and responses and help me brainstorm, debug, or elucidate my thoughts then it is very useful.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

You really put 30 minutes of your own time above all of downsides this has for the rest of us who don't have a use for it (most of the world)?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago
[-] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

All of the resources and energy spent to get you this product you like. You can't discount what it took to create something just because the final product is small and efficient. Take a look at the manufacturing footprint of nearly all complex hardware.

I'm not saying you created the AI but you are one of its supporters, without which there would be no AI.

If this was all just pitched as developing a new plain English coding language, I think the hype following it would be far more appropriate, but then the funding wouldn't follow to support the massive development costs of AI.

Its become a circle of hype chasing money chasing hype.

Its not you that is the problem so to speak though, its the collective "you's" who think the same way.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

I'm not discounting it. Improving productivity for office workers by 1% across the world is a massive amount

The power used to train the AI is alot, but after that using the AI uses a lot less electricity, if an AI spikes my gpu by 10 seconds to type something that would have taken me 30 minutes, I've saved on electricity:

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.06219

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago
[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Too much of an environmental impact for the usefulness imo.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 60 points 1 week ago

It's freeware until someone else take m$ content without paying them, then it's copyright infringement.

[-] [email protected] 47 points 1 week ago

From the article:

Also, in 2022, several unidentified developers sued OpenAI and GitHub based on claims that the organizations used publicly posted programming code to train generative models in violation of software licensing terms

They can argue about it not being a copy all they want. If there is a single GPL licenced line of code scraped then anything they produce is a derivative work & must be licenced GPL.

nice.

[-] threeganzi 2 points 1 week ago

I’ll play the uniformed devils advocate here:

  1. Is the GPL license enforceable?
  2. And if so, I assume “derivative” will still subjective to some degree. Where do we draw the line between derivative and non-derivative?

I’m torn about my personal opinion about copyrights and software licensing in general. I think the main problem is the huge power imbalance between people and corporations, not so much the fact a company analyzed a bunch of available data to solve programming problems.

They don’t copy the data and sell it verbatim to others which would be a legal issue and in my mind also a moral issue, as they don’t add any additional value.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

1: yes

2: Normally derivative works are patched or modified versions of the original. I think the common English meaning would apply & chatGPT et al are fucked. I doubt there is a precedent for this yet.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

The only way I can see them weaseling out of this is by keeping the program running the model made in-house and proprietary while releasing the model in a format unusable without the base (proprietary) program. But maybe the GPL forbids such obfuscstion efforts (I don't know, I haven't studied it in detail)

[-] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

GPL v2 don't, which lead to tivoization. But Linus himself didn't agree with that standing.

[-] [email protected] 43 points 1 week ago

So Windows XP source code leak is now freeware?

[-] [email protected] 35 points 1 week ago

I look forward to the lawsuits that will ultimately cost this man his job.

[-] [email protected] 30 points 1 week ago

He seems to be confusing "freeware", which is basically a license for copyrighted work, with "public domain", which is the absence of a copyright.

[-] [email protected] 26 points 1 week ago

Wow the head of AI for MS doesn’t know what the word freeware means.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

The definition is being changed by Microsoft

[-] [email protected] 24 points 1 week ago

I'm fine with that, but let's put some rules against this.

  • Any AI models should be able to determine the source of their data to a defined level of accuracy.
  • There should be a well-defined way to block data from being used by AI. If one of these ways (e.g. robots.txt) has been breached, the model has to be rebuilt without the data, and reparations made to the content owners.
[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

What you're asking for is literally impossible.

A neural network is basically nothing more than a set of weights. If one word makes a weight go up by 0.0001 and then another word makes it go down by 0.0001, and you do that billions of times for billions of weights, how do you determine what in the data created those weights? Every single thing that's in the training data had some kind of effect on everything else.

It's like combining billions of buckets of water together in a pool and then taking out 1 cup from that and trying to figure out which buckets contributed to that cup. It doesn't make any sense.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Respectfully, I worked for Alexa AI on compositional ML, and we were largely able to do exactly this with customer utterances, so to say it is impossible is simply not true. Many companies have to have some degree of ability to remove troublesome data, and while tracing data inside a model is rather difficult (historically it would be done during the building of datasets or measured at evaluation time) it's definitely something that most big tech companies will do.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Sorry, I misinterpreted what you meant. You said "any AI models" so I thought you were talking about the model itself should somehow know where the data came from. Obviously the companies training the models can catalog their data sources.

But besides that, if you work on AI you should know better than anyone that removing training data is counter to the goal of fixing overfitting. You need more data to make the model more generalized. All you'd be doing is making it more likely to reproduce existing material because it has less to work off of. That's worse for everyone.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

It’s not impossible lol. All a company would need to do is keep track of where they were getting content. If I use a script to download as much of the internet as possible and end up with a bunch of copyrighted content I could still get in trouble, hell there was even a guy arrested for downloading jstor without authorization.. Stop letting these guys get away with crimes just because you like the idea of the end product

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] winterayars 21 points 1 week ago

Man it's crazy how these fuckers basically get to ignore copyright law whenever it's inconvenient to them but if you have one too many Windows machines provisioned they'll send the Spanish Inquisition after you.

[-] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago

Sure thing...now GPL/Creative Commons all your code involved in any way for your models, documentation, parameters, data sets, and allow full unlimited integration and modification by any parties to any portion of it.

[-] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago

The social contract? Tf. The social contract still required attribution in almost all cases for creative work unless explicitlf stated otherwise—especially in the case of comercial products like ChatGPT—so I don’t know where this joker is getting his ideas.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago

I'd like to see this "CEO of AI" stand on the same ground as the CEO of Sex

[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago

I went into a smidge more detail over on my Mastodon last night, but my response is summed up as “WTAF? No! Freeware is an explicit license, as anyone from the BBS days will recall.”

this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
334 points (98.3% liked)

Privacy

29876 readers
1397 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS