This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
So... they are a non-profit (as they initially were) or a public research lab then. That would perfectly fine to say the path that they chose and so happen to make them unbelievably rich, is not viable.
They don't have a business if they can't legally make profit, it's not that hard. I'm sure people who are pursing superhuman intelligence can figure out that much, if not they can ask their "AI" some help to understand.
What a joke.
Some idea for others: If OpenAI wins, then use this case when you get busted for sellling bootleg Blu-Rays (since DVDs are long obsolete) from your truck.
I feel we need a term for "copyright bros".
The more important point is that social media companies can claim to OWN all the content needed to train AI. Same for image sites. That means they get to own the AI models. That means the models will never be free. Which means they control the "means of generation". That means that forever and ever and ever most human labour will be worth nothing while we can't even legally use this power. Double fucked.
YOU the user/product will not gain anything with this copyright strongmanning.
And to the argument itself: Just because AI is better at learning from existing works, faster, more complete, better memory, doesn't meant that it's fundamentally different than humans learning from artwork. Almost EVERY artist arguing for this is stealing themselves since they learned and was inspired by existing works.
But I guess the worst possible outcome is inevitable now.
Hello from our companies "we finally need to get more AI" executive conference. I got find a way to get out of this corporate bullshit...
"We are falling behind" my ass.
Hey, me either. I guess I can steal too.
I stand by my opinion that learning systems training on copyrighted materials isn't the problem, it's companies super eager to replace human workers with automation (or replace skilled workers with cheaper, unskilled workers). The problem is, every worker not working is another adult (and maybe some kids) not eating and not paying rent.
(And for those of you soulless capitalists out there, people without food and shelter is bad. That's a thing we won't tolerate and start looking at you lean-and-hungry-like when it happens. That's what gets us thinking about guillotines hungry for aristocrats.)
In my ideal world, everyone would have food, shelter, clothes, entertainment and a general middle-class lifestyle whether they worked or not, and intellectual-property temporary monopolies would be very short and we'd have a huge public domain. I think the UN wants to be on the same page as me, but the United States and billionaires do not.
All we'd have to worry about is the power demands of AI and cryptomining, which might motivate us to get pure-hydrogen fusion working. Or just keep developing solar, wind, geothermal and tidal power until everyone can run their AC and supercomputer.
Phh, people without food and work can go to the ~~Venus~~ X-enus mining company.
it’s companies super eager to replace human workers with automation (or replace skilled workers with cheaper, unskilled workers). The problem is, every worker not working is another adult (and maybe some kids) not eating and not paying rent.
I agree this is the real problem. (And also shit like Microsoft's "now I can attend three meetings at once" ad) However:
I stand by my opinion that learning systems training on copyrighted materials isn’t the problem
The industries whose works are being used for training are on the front lines of efforts to replace human workers with AI - writers and visual artists.
The industries whose works are being used for training are on the front lines of efforts to replace human workers with AI - writers and visual artists.
Much the way musicians were on the front line when recording was becoming a thing and movies were turning into talkies. But that's the most visible pushout. We're also seeing clerical work getting automated, and once autonomous vehicles become mastered, freight and courier work (driving freight is like a third of the US workforce).
This is much the same way that GMO technology is fine (and will be necessary) but the way Monsanto has been using it as DRM for seeds is unethical.
I think attacking the technology itself doesn't serve to address the unethical part, and kicks the can down the line to where the fight is going to be more intense. But yes, we haven't found our Mahsa Amini moment to justify nationwide general strikes.
As someone who dabbles in sociology (unaccredited), it's vexed me that we can't organize general strikes (or burning down precincts) until enough people die unjustly and horribly, and even then it's not predictable what will do it. For now it means as a species we're going gentle into multiple good nights.
As someone who dabbles in sociology (unaccredited), it’s vexed me that we can’t organize general strikes (or burning down precincts) until enough people die unjustly and horribly, and even then it’s not predictable what will do it. For now it means as a species we’re going gentle into multiple good nights.
I can't tell for most of your post if you are agreeing with me, disagreeing with me, or just adding more info. However, I entirely agree with this bit here from you that I quoted.
Shamed be he who thinks naughty of it. 🤣
If openai gets to use copyrighted content for free, then so should every one else.
If that happens, no point making anything, since your stuff will get stolen anyway
Pay me upfront to make it, subscribe to my patron. If you need my intellectual property to be guaranteed then pay me for a SLA support contract.
Otherwise everything I make is out some other interest and your benifit is just an unintended consequence or because of some charitable notion on my part.
Its crazy how much of the world is actually just this and not some nebulas notion on artificial scarcity of the idea of the things (IP).
Trademark would arguably be uneffected though since that has more to do with fraud protections.
I'm okay with it if they do some kind of open source GPL style license for the copyrighted material, like you can use all the material in the world to train your model, but you can't sell your model for money if it was trained on copyrighted material.
So I got a crazy idea - hear me out - how about we just abolish copyright completely, for everyone?
I mean, it works in China pretty well.
China just ignores violations of foreign copyright by their industries. They enforce Chinese copyrights.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property_in_China
Looks like there are still copyright laws in China. What are you on about?
I don't know why you're being downvoted. China ratified and adheres to the Berne Convention. It has the same shitty Berne copyright laws as most other countries.
1886
Yeah, a bit out of date, huh?
Can't we do a new Berne Convention?
No complaints from me. A lot of people here are saying abolish copyright entirely, which I think goes too far. I liked the original U.S. model, which was 19 years with an option to renew for another 19. That enables things like authors being able to profit from their book sales without worrying about a rival publishing company publishing their book at the same time but also gives a realistic time frame for that to be profitable.
"WE'RE NOT A VIABLE BUSINESS! BWAH!"
Oh. Oh no. Such a shame.
Shut it down then and stop stealing other peoples shit
So say the operators of piracy websites. I'm in favor of media piracy being legalized.
I don't know for sure if you're making the case that media piracy is more or less equivalent to AI being trained on stolen material (I may be reading that wrong)- but I'd like to add that media piracy isn't making money on the backs of hard working people and forming a dystopia in which human art is drowned out by machine hallucinations.
In any case I agree that piracy should be legalized, or rather, that we rethink our approach to media availability and challenge the power and wealth of producers.
oh good. then fuck off. who knew copyright law would eventually be the good guy in a story.
You know that old adage, "You either die the villain or live long enough to become the hero."
;)
that does not sound right, but I don't know enough to argue about it.
I said it intentionally backwards. If I 'm now missing a joke in your comment I apologize. :)
Unregulated areas lead to these type of business practices where the people will squeeze out the juices of these opportunities. The cost of these activities will be passed on the taxpayers.
Good artists copy, great artists steal. If I think even Steve Jobs mentioned having in mind their visit in Xerox Parc research lab
Wait, steal = taking away from the original owner
Meaning, good artist copy, while great artist display anticompetitive behavior?
Now now, I am sure what he meant was they can't make enough profit to bring billions for its shareholders
Fuck OpenAI. I hope they fail.
