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.
OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
51–60 of 166 posts
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#52Earlier 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.
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…
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
If your business model depends on the Roberts' court kneecapping AI, pivot. Training does not constitute "copying" under copyright law because it involves the creation of intermediate, non-expressive data abstractions that do not reproduce or communicate the copyrighted work's original expression. This process aligns with fair use principles, as it is transformative, serves a distinct purpose (machine learning innova…
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#54Earlier 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.
When OpenAI's servers do it its copyright infringement.
We don't apply copyrights to human brains, but we do apply copyright to computer memory.
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
>Take autonomous driving for example - a driver of a car sees a person attempting to cross a street in front of them. A human can decide to slam the brake or the gas depending on the context - is the person crossing the car some old granny on a walker or a soccer player? Or a human sees a ball being kicked into the air on the sidewalk behind some cars, with no humans visible. The human can infer "whoops, there might…
It could be possible to use LLMs to build a rube goldberg type of brain or somethingt hat will mimic a human brain but it will have the same flaws LLMs have and will never reach parity with humans. I think AGI is possible but we’re too focused on LLMs to get there yet.
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#56Earlier 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.
The problem is not "when learning", the problem is "when distributing". Courts will determine whether or not disseminating or giving access to a model trained on protected works counts as distributing protected derivative works or not.
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#57Earlier 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.
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The only change they are motivated by is their bank balances. If this were a less useful tool they’d still be motivated to ignore laws and exploit others.
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#59Earlier 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.
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…
Like selling it for money seems like a clear line crossed, and Etsy is the perfect gatekeeper here.
Re: OpenAI fails to deliver opt-out system for photographers
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.