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

OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 166 posts

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#41

Post by PittleyDunkin »

mschuster91 wrote: post #24
wilg wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who cares if they do it with LLMs or not? how do you define agi?

> how do you define agi? An AI that has enough sense of self-awareness to not hallucinate and to recognize the borders of its knowledge on its own . That is fundamentally impossible to do with LLMs because in the end, they are all next-token predictors while humans are capable of a much more complex model of storing and associating information and context, and most importantly, develop "mental models" from that infor…

> An AI that has enough sense of self-awareness to not hallucinate

It's not entirely clear that this is meaningful. Humans engage in confabulation, too.

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#42

Post by llm_trw »

simonw wrote: post #30
echelon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insofar as data for diffusion / image / video models are concerned, the rise of synthetic data and data efficiency will mean that none of this really matters anyway. We were just in the bootstrapping phase. You can bolt on new functional modules and train them with very limited data you acquire from Unreal Engine or in the field.

Has synthetic data become a big part of image/video models? I understand why it's useful and popular for training LLMs, but I didn't think it was applicable to generative image/video work.

I haven't had the chance to train diffusion models but for detection models synthetic data is absolutely how you get state of the art performance now. You just need a relatively tiny extremely high quality dataset to bootstrap from.

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#43

Post by CamperBob2 »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #37
CamperBob2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even understand why it's everyone elses problem to opt-out. Because the work being done, from the point of view of people who believe they are on the verge of creating AGI, is arguably more important than copyright. Less controversially: if the courts determine that training an ML model is not fair use, then anyone who respects copyright law will end up with an uncompetitive model. As will anyone operating in…

Of note here is the reason it's "important" is it will make a shit-ton of money.

That, coupled with the obvious ideological motivations. Success could alter the course of human history, maybe even for the better.

If you feel that what you're doing is that important, you're not going to let copyright law get in the way, and it would be silly to expect you to.

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#44

Post by llm_trw »

griomnib wrote: post #34
oraphalous wrote: post #8

I don't even understand why it's everyone elses problem to opt-out. Eventually - for how many of these AI companies would a person have to track down their opt-out processes just to protect their work from AI? That's crazy. OpenAI should be contacting every single one and asking for permission - like everyone has to in order to use a person's work. How they are getting away with this is beyond me.

Napster had a moment too, but then they got steamrolled in court. Courts are slow, so it seems like nothing is happening, but there’s tons of cases in the pipeline. The media industry has forced many tech firms to bend the knee, OpenAI will follow suit. Nobody rips off Disney IP and lives to tell the tale.

And yet Micky Mouse is in the public domain. Something those of us who remember the 90s thought would never happen.

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#45

Post by Der_Einzige »

Good.

Everyone gets big mad when someone with money acts like Aaron Swartz did. The only bad thing about OpenAI is that they're not actually open sourcing or open accessing their stuff. Mistral or Llama "training on pirated material" is literally a feature, not a bug and the tears from all the artists and others who get mad are delicious. These same artists would profess literal radical marxism but become capitalist luddite copyright trolls the moment that the means of intellectual production became democratized against their will.

If you posted something on the internet, I can and will put it into ipadapter and take your style and use it for my own interests. You cannot stop me except by not posting it where I can access it. That is the burden of posting anything on the public internet. You opt out by not doing it.

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#46

Post by JambalayaJimbo »

llm_trw wrote: post #40
toddmorey wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t entirely agree. For example, it’s a very popular scheme on Etsy right now to use LLMs to generate posters in the style of popular artists. Any artist should be able to say hey I don’t want my works to be part of your training set to power derivative generations. And I think it should even apply retroactively so that they have to retrain their models that are already generating works from training data consume…

Should any artist be able to tell another artist: hey don't copy my work when you're learning, I don't want competition? It seems like they are deeply upset someone has figured out a way for a machine to do what artists have been doing since time immemorial.

Llms are not humans and shouldn’t be anthropomorphized as a strategy to get around copyright infringement.

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#47

Post by numpad0 »

echelon wrote: post #7
toddmorey wrote: post #6

No way OpenAI will ever “good citizen” this. Tools to opt out of training sets will only come if they are legally compelled. Governments will have to make respecting some sort of training preference header on public content mandatory I think. The fact that photographers have to independently submit each piece of work they wanted excluded along with detailed descriptions just shows how much they DONT want anyone exclu…

Insofar as data for diffusion / image / video models are concerned, the rise of synthetic data and data efficiency will mean that none of this really matters anyway. We were just in the bootstrapping phase. You can bolt on new functional modules and train them with very limited data you acquire from Unreal Engine or in the field.

Isn't that just weird cope? I mean, why not just LLM automate UE if that's the goal & how isn't that itself going to get torpedoed by Epic?

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#48

Post by llm_trw »

JambalayaJimbo wrote: post #46
llm_trw wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should any artist be able to tell another artist: hey don't copy my work when you're learning, I don't want competition? It seems like they are deeply upset someone has figured out a way for a machine to do what artists have been doing since time immemorial.

Llms are not humans and shouldn’t be anthropomorphized as a strategy to get around copyright infringement.

That's an opinion that will be tested in a court soon enough.

Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers

#49

Post by [deleted] »

llm_trw wrote: post #40
toddmorey wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t entirely agree. For example, it’s a very popular scheme on Etsy right now to use LLMs to generate posters in the style of popular artists. Any artist should be able to say hey I don’t want my works to be part of your training set to power derivative generations. And I think it should even apply retroactively so that they have to retrain their models that are already generating works from training data consume…

Should any artist be able to tell another artist: hey don't copy my work when you're learning, I don't want competition? It seems like they are deeply upset someone has figured out a way for a machine to do what artists have been doing since time immemorial.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN