1209
Then let it be over then.
this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1209 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
66584 readers
3880 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
But if you stop me from criming, how will I get better at crime!?!
Good. I hope this is what happens.
- LLM algorithms can be maintained and sold to corpos to scrape their own data so they can use them for in house tools, or re-sell them to their own clients.
- Open Source LLMs can be made available for end users to do the same with their own data, or scrape whats available in the public domain for whatever they want so long as they don't re-sell
- Altman can go fuck himself
No amigo, it's not fair if you're profiting from it in the long run.
To be fair copyright is a disease. But then so is billionaires, capitalism, business, etc.
I mean, if there's a war, and you shoot somebody, does that make you bad?
Yes and no.
Good.
This is basically a veiled admission that OpenAI are falling behind in the very arms race they started. Good, fuck Altman. We need less ultra-corpo tech bro bullshit in prevailing technology.
These fuckers are the first one to send tons of lawyers whenever you republish or use any IP of them. Fuck these idiots.
I think the answer is there just do what deepseek did.
I have conflicting feelings about this whole thing. If you are selling the result of training like OpenAI does (and every other company), then I feel like it’s absolutely and clearly not fair use. It’s just theft with extra steps.
On the other hand, what about open source projects and individuals who aren’t selling or competing with the owners of the training material? I feel like that would be fair use.
What keeps me up at night is if training is never fair use, then the natural result is that AI becomes monopolized by big companies with deep pockets who can pay for an infinite amount of random content licensing, and then we are all forever at their mercy for this entire branch of technology.
The practical, socioeconomic, and ethical considerations are really complex, but all I ever see discussed are these hard-line binary stances that would only have awful corporate-empowering consequences, either because they can steal content freely or because they are the only ones that will have the resources to control the technology.
Japan already passed a law that explicitly allows training on copyrighted material. And many other countries just wouldn’t care. So if it becomes a real problem the companies will just move.
I think they need to figure out a middle ground where we can extract value from the for profit AI companies but not actually restrict the competition.
I dont wanna be mean but I always thought this guy had a weird face
Good. If I ever published anything, I would absolutely not want it to be pirated by AI so some asshole can plagiarize it later down the line and not even cite their sources.
Oh no, not the plagiarizing machine! How are rich hacks going to feign talent now? Pay an artist for it?! Crazy!
Fuck these psychos. They should pay the copyright they stole with the billions they already made. Governments should protect people, MDF
TLDR: "we should be able to steal other people's work, or we'll go crying to daddy Trump. But DeepSeek shouldn't be able to steal from the stuff we stole, because China and open source"
At the end of the day the fact that openai lost their collective shit when a Chinese company used their data and model to make their own more efficient model is all the proof I need they don't care about being fair or equitable when they get mad at people doing the exact thing they did and would aggressively oppose others using their own work to advance their own.
load more comments
(1 replies)
If giant megacorporations can benefit by ignoring copyright, us mortals should be able to as well.
Until then, you have the public domain to train on. If you don't want AI to talk like the 1920s, you shouldn't have extended copyright and robbed society of a robust public domain.
Either we can now have full authority to do anything we want with copyright, or the companies have to have to abide the same rules the plebs and serfs have to and only take from media a century ago, or stuff that fell through the cracks like Night of the Living Dead.
Copyright has always been a farce and a lie for the corporations, so it's nothing new that its "Do as I say, not as I do."
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Do you promise?!?!
Sounds fair, shut it down.
Maybe as a consumer product but governments will still want it
Why training openai with literally millions of copyrighted works is fair use, but me downloading an episode of a series not available in any platform means years of prison?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Time to sail the high seas.
Good. Fuck AI
Fuck OpenAI for stealing the hard work of millions of people
If I had to pay tuition for education (buying text books, pay for classes and stuff), then you have to pay me to train your stupid AI using my materials.
Vote pirate party.
“The plagiarism machine will break without more things to plagiarize.”
As an artist, kindly get fucked ass hole. I'd like compensation for all the work of mine you stole.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Open can suck some dick.
view more: next ›