OpenAI declares AI race “over” if training on copyrighted works isn’t fair use
OpenAI declares AI race “over” if training on copyrighted works isn’t fair use
National security hinges on unfettered access to AI training data, OpenAI says.
I find it odd that Lemmy users are so adverse to tech.
Sorry to say, but he's right. For AI to truly flourish in the West, it needs access to all previously human made information and media.
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.
As an artist, kindly get fucked ass hole. I'd like compensation for all the work of mine you stole.
"How are we supposed to win the race if we can't cheat?!"
“The plagiarism machine will break without more things to plagiarize.”
Okay.
It was fun while it lasted.
For someone.
I presume.
Oh no anyway.jpg
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.
I'll take him seriously if & when OpenAI lives up to its name.
So, did we win?
Oops, oh well. I very much hope it's over, asshole.
over it is then. Buh bye!
Business that stole everyone's information to train a model complains that businesses can steal information to train models.
Yeah I'll pour one out for folks who promised to open-source their model and then backed out the moment the money appeared... Wankers.
looks good
"We can't succeed without breaking the law. We can't succeed without operating unethically."
I'm so sick of this bullshit. They pretend to love a free market until it's not in their favor and then they ask us to bend over backwards for them.
Too many people think they're superior. Which is ironic, because they're also the ones asking for handouts and rule bending. If you were superior, you wouldn't need all the unethical things that you're asking for.
So pirating full works for commercial use suddenly is "fair use", or what? Lets see what e.g. Disney says about this.
Apparantly their trying to get Deepseek banned again, really doesn't like competition this guy.
Where are the copyright lawsuits by Nintendo and Disney when you need them lol
Good.
Fuck Sam Altman's greed. Pay the fucking artists you're robbing.
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.
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?
If I'm using "AI" to generate subtitles for the "community" is ok if i have a large "datastore" of "licensable media" stored locally to work off of right?
Come on guys, his company is only worth $157 billion.
Of course he can't pay for content he needs for his automated bullshit machine. He's not made of money!
If everyone can 'train' themselves on copyrighted works, then I say "fair game.''
Otherwise, get fucked.
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!
What is the charge, officer? Eating a meal? A succulent Chinese meal?
I'm fine with this. "We can't succeed without breaking the law" isn't much of an argument.
Do I think the current copyright laws around the world are fine? No, far from it.
But why do they merit an exception to the rules that will make them billions, but the rest of us can be prosecuted in severe and dramatic fashion for much less. Try letting the RIAA know you have a song you've downloaded on your PC that you didn't pay for - tell them it's for "research and training purposes", just like AI uses stuff it didn't pay for - and see what I mean by severe and dramatic.
It should not be one rule for the rich guys to get even richer and the rest of us can eat dirt.
Figure out how to fix the laws in a way that they're fair for everyone, including figuring out a way to compensate the people whose IP you've been stealing.
Until then, deal with the same legal landscape as everyone else. Boo hoo
Come on bro, let us pirate bro, just one more ngram of books bro
Suddenly millions of people are downloading to "train their AI models".
For Sam:
Sounds like another way of saying "there actually isn't a profitable business in this."
But since we live in crazy world, once he gets his exemption to copyright laws for AI, someone needs to come up with a good self hosted AI toolset that makes it legal for the average person to pirate stuff at scale as well.
Why does Sam keep threatening us with a good time?
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.
It's so wild how laws just have no idea what to do with you if you just add one layer of proxy. "Nooo I'm not stealing and plagerizing, it's the AI doing it!"
This sounds like socialism is good for capitalists
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.
I don’t think they’re wrong in saying that if they aren’t allowed to train on copyrighted works then they will fall behind. Maybe I missed it in the article, but Japan for example has that exact law (use of copyright to train generative AI is allowed).
Personally I think we need to give them somewhat of an out by letting them do it but then taxing the fuck out of the resulting product. “You can use copyrighted works for training but then 50% of your profits are taxed”. Basically a recognition that the sum of all copyrighted works is a societal good and not just an individual copyright holders.
I need a seamstress AI to take over 10 million seamstress robots so I don't have to pay 100million seamstresses for fruit of the loom underwear.... Could you tech it how to do double well and then back up at each end with some zigzags? For free? I mean everyone knows zigzag!
yeah thats crazy
So all I need to do if I get caught torrenting a movie is say that im training an LLM for subtitles?
Then perish, OpenAI. If your only innovation is a legal loophole then you did nothing.
Good. Fuck off.
Technofascism on its way to legalize my 30TB trove of backups
Then die. I don't know what else to tell you.
If your business model is predicated on breaking the law then you don't deserve to exist.
You can't send people to prison for 5 years and charge them $100,000 for downloading a movie and then turn around and let big business do it for free because they need to "train their AI model" and call one of thief but not the other...
Sadly this comes down to OpenAI petitioning Trump, and expecting trump to do anything that could stop a scam like AI is pointless.
My main takeaway is that some contrived notion of "national security" has now become an acceptable justification for business decisions in the US.
"How am I supposed to make any money if I can't steal all of my products to sell back to the world that produced them?"
Yeah, fuck that. The whole industry deserves to die.
🤞🤞 🙏
As far as the ai industry has already broken copyright laws. It will not be actually intelligent for a long time. Just like crypto this seems like a global scam that has squandered resources for a dream of a free workforce. Instead of working together to try and create an ai there are lots of technology companies doing the same ineffective bull 🤔
They are US based right?
So they literally do whatever they want anyway regardless of what any law might say.
I always felt using publicly available but copyrighted works could be ok but only if the model is publicly available as well
AI always been about using stolen stuff
National security my ass. More like his time span to show more dumb "achievements" while getting richer depends on it and nothing else
He means development of AI in public view is over. Governments will continue without regard for copyright protections until we are all dead.
How many pages has a human author read and written before they can produce something worth publishing? I’m pretty sure that’s not even a million pages. Why does an AI require a gazillion pages to learn, but the quality is still unimpressive? I think there’s something fundamentally wrong with the way we teach these models.
Its simple really. We need to steal from humans who make things to train our computers to make things so the computers can replace the humans who make things and we dont want to pay the humans who made the original things because they will be replaced soon enough anyway. Easy peasy. Do you guys even capitalism?
Guarantee their plan is to blow through copyright laws to create a monopoly fiefdom, close the door behind them and demand that copyright is used to protect the work their LLM creates.
Good, fuck "AI" fuck copyright, fuck patents, fuck proprietary closed-source software, fuck capitalism, fuck billionaires, and fuck you, Sam, in particular.
🏴☠️
Sad to see you leave (not really, tho'), love to watch you go!
Edit: I bet if any AI developing company would stop acting and being so damned shady and would just ASK FOR PERMISSION, they'd receive a huge amount of data from all over. There are a lot of people who would like to see AGI become a real thing, but not if it's being developed by greedy and unscrupulous shitheads. As it stands now, I think the only ones who are actually doing it for the R&D and not as eye-candy to glitz away people's money for aesthetically believable nonsense are a handful of start-up-likes with (not in a condescending way) kids who've yet to have their dreams and idealism trampled.
Corporations trying to profit by closing off vast tracts of human output are bumping into other corporations trying to mine it for profit.
Oh no! How could we ever live without AI?
Idk about that, but openai is probably over
Yes, please.
Are they listening to themselves?
Is that a promise?
Ip should solely be with the creator and not the corporation that owns that creator. A lot of problems in stems is IP held hostage by the corporations and by publishing companies of research papers
He's right tho. China don't care. You think the west will be able to outcompete China with such limitations?
And the end result is the same, no one was compensated and a dictatorship is running one of the most important new IT tools.
We need to annect Austria, Czechoslovak Republic and Poland otherwise China will do it first.
Hail Hydrachatgpt is stagnant, the newest model was lackluster despite using way more resources and costing a shitload of cash, Altman is floundering and on his way out he’s going to try do some lobbying bullshit
Copyright is bullshit and honestly if it disappeared it would help small creators more than anything but openai is not a small creator and guaranteed they will lobby for only huge corps like them to get such an exception. You and I will still get sued to shit by disney or whoever for daring to make $500 off of a shitty project that used some sample or something while meta and openai get free reign to steal the entirety of humanity’s creative output with no recompense
So what Altman is saying here is that without the low hanging fruit of human generated training data, the AI race is over.
He's either full of shit or this AI bubble is about to burst.
Many of you are completely two-faced on copyright laws.
He's afraid of losing his little empire.
OpenAI also had no clue on recreation the happy little accident that gave them chatGPT3. That's mostly because their whole thing was using a simple model and brute forcing it with more data, more power, more nodes and then even more data and power until it produced results.
As expected, this isn't sustainable. It's beyond the point of decreasing returns. But Sam here has no idea on how to fix that with much better models so goes back to the one thing he knows: more data needed, just one more terabyte bro, ignore the copyright!
And now he's blaming the Chinese into forcing him to use even more data.
I mean if they pay for it like everyone else does I don't think it is a problem. Yes it will cost you billions and billions to do it correctly, but then you basically have the smartest creature on earth (that we know of) and you can replicate/improve on it in perpetuity. We still will have to pay you licensing fees to use it in our daily lives, so you will be making those billions back.
Now I would say let them use anything that is old and freeware, textbooks, etc. government owned stuff - we sponsored it with our learning, taxes - so we get a percentage in all AI companies. Humanity gets a 51% stake in any AI business using humanity's knowledge, so we are then free to vote on how the tech is being used and we have a controlling share, also whatever price is set, we get half of it back in taxes at the end of the year. The more you use it the more you pay and the more you get back.
Stop the count!
Oh noooooooooooo.
/s.
Strange that no one mentioned openai making money off copyrighted works.
Okay, bye!