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

Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

den.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 270 posts

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#101

Post by thieaway3947 »

dehrmann wrote: post #91
dend wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the grand scheme of things and at this point, it probably doesn't matter. I know for me it certainly is not in any shape a discouragement to continue writing on my blog and contributing code to open source communities (my own and others). But if we're going to dig into this a bit, one person reading my code, internalizing it, processing it themselves, tweaking it and experimenting with it, and then shipping someth…

> The opposite of that is some massively funded company taking my content, training a model off of it, and then reaping profits while the authors don't even get as much as an acknowledgement. Taking out the "training a model" part, the same thing could happen with a human at the company.

This is already a scenario that people generally accept as bad, could you elaborate the point you are making?

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#102

Post by baxtr »

rpcope1 wrote: post #44

> Exploiting user-generated content. You know, if I've noticed anything in the past couple years, it's that even if you self-host your own site, it's still going to get hoovered up and used/exploited by things like AI training bots. I think between everyone's code getting trained on, even if it's AGPLv3 or something similarly restrictive, and generally everything public on the internet getting "trained" and "transfor…

Part of me viscerally agrees because large corporations have monetized UGC.

Another part of me though thinks differently. We are a species that builds knowledge from generation to generation. From one person to another. Over years, over centuries.

Philosophically this part tends to think that your thoughts and ideas belong to humanity and thus need to be shared with all of us.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#104

Post by ehnto »

chii wrote: post #51
dend wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing to disagree in this statement, for sure. If it's on the open internet, it will almost surely be used for AI training, consent be damned. But it feels like even at a rudimentary level, if I post a picture on my site that is then used by a large publisher for ads, I would (at least in theory) have some recourse to pursue the matter and prevent them from using my content. In contrast, if I uploaded something to…

> Meta "sublicensed" my image to someone else, I wouldn't have much to say there. but you agreed to this, when agreeing to the TOS. > I post a picture on my site that is then used by a large publisher for ads, I would (at least in theory) have some recourse which you didn't sign any contract, and therefore it is a violation of copyright. But the new AI training methods are currently, at least imho, not a violation of…

Strong disagree on the last paragraph. It's data online, your data, and it was used for commercial purposes without your consent.

In fact, I never consented for anyone to access my server. Just because it has an IP address, does not make it a public service.

Obviously in a practical sense that is a silly position to take, and in prior cases there is usually an extenuating factor that got the person charged, eg breaking through access controls, violating ToS, or intellectual property violations.

But I don't rescind the prior statement. Just because I have an address doesn't mean you can come in through any unlocked doors.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#105

Post by immibis »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #59
rpcope1 wrote: post #44

> Exploiting user-generated content. You know, if I've noticed anything in the past couple years, it's that even if you self-host your own site, it's still going to get hoovered up and used/exploited by things like AI training bots. I think between everyone's code getting trained on, even if it's AGPLv3 or something similarly restrictive, and generally everything public on the internet getting "trained" and "transfor…

> I can absolutely see why someone rational would want to share a whole lot less, anywhere, in an open fashion, regardless of where it's hosted. I've reached the same conclusion. All data is just bits. Numbers. Once it's out there, trying to control their spread and use is just delusional. People should just stop sharing things publicly. Even things like AGPLv3 are proving to be ineffective against their exploitation…

There are two ways we can go from "copyright for me, no copyright for thee"

We can force it to "copyright for me, copyright for thee" by injecting AI poison and by not sharing at all. See Nightshade.

Or we can force it to "no copyright for me, no copyright for thee" by ignoring their copyright just like they ignore ours, and making sure they don't find us. See Anna's Archive.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#106

Post by immibis »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #17

This all sounds like renting to me. Instead you should: - put a rack in your home - buy an IPv4 block - buy dark fibre - start your own ISP - advertise routes over BGP - host your own email - found a registrar and transfer your domains over All easily obtainable for less than a million dollars in capital. Though once your FTTH and undersea cable operations ramp up you'll need further access to capital.

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

There are also Tor hidden services, where the dependency on lower layers still exists but they can't find which is yours.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#107

Post by immibis »

sshine wrote: post #2

tl;dr: - Don't depend on other people's software services. - Buy a domain and host your own website. - Don't pick a sketchy TLD or registrar. - Mailing lists beat social media accounts. - It's okay to depend on a cloud. I had the belief that the article was going to say the exact opposite wrt. cloud hosting. You're literally renting space, and if your stuff gets any heat, your cloud provider may simply shut you down…

The insidious part of networking is that you cannot be on a network without agreeing with everyone else on the network. It's simply not possible.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#108

Post by dend »

veltas wrote: post #103

This article recommends .eu domains. There is a caveat to this, in the unlikely event your state leaves the EU you will be forced off, this happened to many UK entities after Brexit, they were forced to stop using their .eu domains.

Fair point - I will add that as a clarification, thank you for calling it out.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#109

Post by yowayb »

baxtr wrote: post #102
rpcope1 wrote: post #44

> Exploiting user-generated content. You know, if I've noticed anything in the past couple years, it's that even if you self-host your own site, it's still going to get hoovered up and used/exploited by things like AI training bots. I think between everyone's code getting trained on, even if it's AGPLv3 or something similarly restrictive, and generally everything public on the internet getting "trained" and "transfor…

Part of me viscerally agrees because large corporations have monetized UGC. Another part of me though thinks differently. We are a species that builds knowledge from generation to generation. From one person to another. Over years, over centuries. Philosophically this part tends to think that your thoughts and ideas belong to humanity and thus need to be shared with all of us.

Great take. Also agree with parent. I feel like some form of provenance would take us to the next level.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#110

Post by PittleyDunkin »

chii wrote: post #51
dend wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing to disagree in this statement, for sure. If it's on the open internet, it will almost surely be used for AI training, consent be damned. But it feels like even at a rudimentary level, if I post a picture on my site that is then used by a large publisher for ads, I would (at least in theory) have some recourse to pursue the matter and prevent them from using my content. In contrast, if I uploaded something to…

> Meta "sublicensed" my image to someone else, I wouldn't have much to say there. but you agreed to this, when agreeing to the TOS. > I post a picture on my site that is then used by a large publisher for ads, I would (at least in theory) have some recourse which you didn't sign any contract, and therefore it is a violation of copyright. But the new AI training methods are currently, at least imho, not a violation of…

> but you agreed to this, when agreeing to the TOS

The legal definition of agreement means basically zilch

Post reply on HN