Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

in.mashable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 90 posts

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#81

Post by Turing_Machine »

isodev wrote: post #3
photoGrant wrote: post #2

I asked this question a few days ago and the responses, arrogance and ignorance was astounding. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39406709 I promise, if I'm here asking this week, there's millions more that will be asking next week. Carving out the labour market has more consequences than increasing productivity. It destroys culture, society and a will to live. Wise up. edit: And before the inevitable responses be…

I still don't get how people believe one can make money out of other people's creative works (on a mass scale at that) and get away with it. Training an AI is not fair use and has nothing to do with open source. Posting content online doesn't automagically make it usable for whatever purpose.

> Training an AI is not fair use

You don't get to decide that, certainly not as a blanket statement. We're gonna have to wait for the courts.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#82

Post by Turing_Machine »

asdfgjkl wrote: post #31
scarmig wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preventing or slowing the development of AI is just a startling contempt for human life. Every day millions of people die unnecessarily. Willingness to let that happen because you think your family (or, most likely, a giant corporation) deserves to be paid for a century after you die is sheer selfishness and ignorance.

How exactly is content generation helping with preventing unnecessary death?

Well, for one, you can't read a lot of scientific journals without paying massive fees.

That arguably slows down the pace of medical advance.

One might note that those massive fees do not go to the "creatives", in this case the scientists. The scientist do the research, write the papers, peer-review the papers of others, edit the journals... and the publisher pockets the money. That's the case with most "intellectual property" -- the person who actually gets paid the lion's share is not the "creative".

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#83

Post by Turing_Machine »

isodev wrote: post #71
Throwaway1746 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Training an AI is not fair use That's not for you to decide. >has nothing to do with open source It has everything to do with open source. If only Disney and getty images are allowed to train ai, there will be extreme monopolisation.

> That's not for you to decide. Of course it is, my content my rules.

"Fair use" is a legal concept that has been hammered out by government regulations and the courts.

You don't get to make up your own laws, mang.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#85

Post by scarmig »

photoGrant wrote: post #39
scarmig wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preventing or slowing the development of AI is just a startling contempt for human life. Every day millions of people die unnecessarily. Willingness to let that happen because you think your family (or, most likely, a giant corporation) deserves to be paid for a century after you die is sheer selfishness and ignorance.

If this was all done in the open as hoped, as promised and the worlds scientists were in pursuit of the same goal, I'd accept these arguments all day and keep my ignorant mouth shut. But to lie and say otherwise goes against the timeline of history we're all a part of. OpenAI lied about its openness. It then aligned militarily. It didn't offer to remove your data before this came into effect, did it? Source me if I'm…

It would obviously be better if everything were done in the open. But you can't simply say "corporations will corrupt AI with copyright regime X" and compare it to a hypothetical universe "copyright regime Y will result in corporations acting with altruism." Regardless, corporations are going to be rent-seeking parasites trying to maximize their profits at all costs.

The world you're arguing for isn't one where small-time artists are adequately compensated for their work. It's one where Disney and Elsevier collect a bunch of rents and hold back development of tools that would radically improve human well-being. Even in the best case, your copyright suggestion will privilege the giant corporations who have the capability to navigate copyright rules against a bunch of other giant corporations, at the expense of smaller researchers and hobbyists.

I'd be more than happy to sign into something saying "a small artist has a right to prevent training on their work without permission for a decade after it's released." But that is not in the cards, unfortunately.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#86

Post by scarmig »

photoGrant wrote: post #76
tivert wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just a parody of accelerationist logic. There are so many fools on the internet that you often can't tell the fake fools from the real ones unless they give themselves away.

Currently the weapons against bullshit is trying to talk to it. Engage and you'll find only 5% of the time there is depth, or earnest. The rest is just airing itself like dirty laundry by the second response and ultimately just serves in contributing to a humans ability to quickly adapt to new environments. Which means bullshit just smells more nuanced today.

Some of us sleep and aren't to be arguing against responses left at 1AM their time :)

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#87

Post by tivert »

scarmig wrote: post #85
photoGrant wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this was all done in the open as hoped, as promised and the worlds scientists were in pursuit of the same goal, I'd accept these arguments all day and keep my ignorant mouth shut. But to lie and say otherwise goes against the timeline of history we're all a part of. OpenAI lied about its openness. It then aligned militarily. It didn't offer to remove your data before this came into effect, did it? Source me if I'm…

It would obviously be better if everything were done in the open. But you can't simply say "corporations will corrupt AI with copyright regime X" and compare it to a hypothetical universe "copyright regime Y will result in corporations acting with altruism." Regardless, corporations are going to be rent-seeking parasites trying to maximize their profits at all costs. The world you're arguing for isn't one where small…

> Even in the best case, your copyright suggestion will privilege the giant corporations who have the capability to navigate copyright rules against a bunch of other giant corporations, at the expense of smaller researchers and hobbyists.

Copyright doesn't really privilege giant corporations. In a world without it, they can just use their market power and immense resources (e.g., SaaS) to protect their interests.

Copyright is one of the few tools the little guy can use to protect their interests against giant corporations. Abolish it, and one of the first things that will happen is the RIAA will stop paying artists anything and become the biggest "pirate" in the world.

It's mind boggling how some people have that so backwards. I'm guessing it stems from only thinking about copyright in the context of "RIAA sues..." articles and complaints about Elsevier, without thinking about it from any other angles.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#88

Post by photoGrant »

tivert wrote: post #87
scarmig wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would obviously be better if everything were done in the open. But you can't simply say "corporations will corrupt AI with copyright regime X" and compare it to a hypothetical universe "copyright regime Y will result in corporations acting with altruism." Regardless, corporations are going to be rent-seeking parasites trying to maximize their profits at all costs. The world you're arguing for isn't one where small…

> Even in the best case, your copyright suggestion will privilege the giant corporations who have the capability to navigate copyright rules against a bunch of other giant corporations, at the expense of smaller researchers and hobbyists. Copyright doesn't really privilege giant corporations. In a world without it, they can just use their market power and immense resources (e.g., SaaS) to protect their interests. Cop…

It's cognitive dissonance to such an arrogant and ignorant degree it's turning out to be the best sunlight we've ever needed on the situation. No one is arguing a balanced or logical alternative. Every argument ignores the entire landscape of issues and reduces it to 'what's yours is mine but what's mine is not yours'..... They're arguing to keep the toys in their playground. Even if it's not their toy. It's 'in the world' so we're free to take it.

Ok! I appreciate this insight. At this point I'll be 'scraping' everything from tech and fight this in court with their own words.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#89

Post by r721 »

photoGrant wrote: post #2

I asked this question a few days ago and the responses, arrogance and ignorance was astounding. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39406709 I promise, if I'm here asking this week, there's millions more that will be asking next week. Carving out the labour market has more consequences than increasing productivity. It destroys culture, society and a will to live. Wise up. edit: And before the inevitable responses be…

>The speed of engagement in this thread and the fact it doesn't exist on the front page... or the second

These two things are connected, actually:

>The FAQ notes that submission rank is impacted by "software which downweights overheated discussions." A good rule of thumb for this effect is when the number of comments on a submission exceeds its score.

https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented?tab=re...

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#90

Post by anigbrowl »

scarmig wrote: post #10
fatherzine wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the attitude of those that do it: "what are you going to do about it?". escalatory power games, not an ounce of caring for your fellow man, barely a veneer of. we have entered very dark waters. unclear where the exit is.

Preventing or slowing the development of AI is just a startling contempt for human life. Every day millions of people die unnecessarily. Willingness to let that happen because you think your family (or, most likely, a giant corporation) deserves to be paid for a century after you die is sheer selfishness and ignorance.

False equivalence much?!
Post reply on HN