There needs to be a worldwide standard, such as an HTML tag, that says "no training". And a few countries need to make it a punishable offense to violate the tag. The punishment should be exceptionally severe, not just a fine. For example: any company that violates the tag should be completely barred from operating, forever.
That will play out exactly like the "Do not track" bit did.
X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
21–30 of 217 posts
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#22Weird this just happened. I assumed all sites with any sort of content changed their terms soon after ChatGPT hit the scene.
You must not, and must not allow those acting on your behalf to:
...use the Data APIs to encourage or promote illegal activity or violation of third party rights (including using User Content to train a machine learning or AI model without the express permission of rightsholders in the applicable User Content);
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#23Weird this just happened. I assumed all sites with any sort of content changed their terms soon after ChatGPT hit the scene.
Yep, from https://the-decoder.com/reddit-ends-its-role-as-a-free-ai-tr... : You must not, and must not allow those acting on your behalf to: ...use the Data APIs to encourage or promote illegal activity or violation of third party rights (including using User Content to train a machine learning or AI model without the express permission of rightsholders in the applicable User Content);
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#24If an artist or author can't do this, social media shouldn't be able to do it either. If Xai wants to train on public corpus, it shouldn't be allowed to prevent its own corpus from being used. We need regulations to limit the power grabs. Train all you like, but don't dare try to constrain to your walled gardens. We should also probably nip the "foundation model company / also a social media company" conglomeration i…
> If an artist or author can't do this, social media shouldn't be able to do it either. Even if this is done, the case of starving artist v. megacorp will probably go to whoever wields the most money and lawyers. To add insult to injury, the artist’s opponent is fueled by their ill-gotten gains.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#25There needs to be a worldwide standard, such as an HTML tag, that says "no training". And a few countries need to make it a punishable offense to violate the tag. The punishment should be exceptionally severe, not just a fine. For example: any company that violates the tag should be completely barred from operating, forever.
Any country that seriously implemented this would just end up being completely dominated by the autonomous robot soldiers of another country that didn't, because it effectively bans the development of embodied AGI (which can learn live from seeing/reading something, like a human can).
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#26If an artist or author can't do this, social media shouldn't be able to do it either. If Xai wants to train on public corpus, it shouldn't be allowed to prevent its own corpus from being used. We need regulations to limit the power grabs. Train all you like, but don't dare try to constrain to your walled gardens. We should also probably nip the "foundation model company / also a social media company" conglomeration i…
Artists can do this, and they do
Big companies like the New York Times and Twitter/X have the funds to pay for this. Miscellaneous artists probably don't.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#27Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#28wish I could change my terms to bar training of AI models on my content
Same here! It should be a default. Unfortunately, the very openness of the internet is now working against us.
We're already seeing precedent that it might be.
https://www.ecjlaw.com/ecj-blog/kadrey-v-meta-the-first-majo...
The openness of the internet is a good thing, but it doesn't come without a cost. And the moment we have to pay that cost, we don't get to suddenly go, "well, openness turned out to be a mistake, let's close it all up and create a regulatory, bureaucratic nightmare". This is the tradeoff. Freedom for me, and thee.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If an artist or author can't do this, social media shouldn't be able to do it either. Even if this is done, the case of starving artist v. megacorp will probably go to whoever wields the most money and lawyers. To add insult to injury, the artist’s opponent is fueled by their ill-gotten gains.
This is dependent on country. USA, yes with their draconian methods. Countries like the UK, the looser of the suit pays all the cost. UK layers have no problem taking low wealth client cases they know will win. UK allows for David vs Goliath and David to win. US up lifts Goliath as a God.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#30There needs to be a worldwide standard, such as an HTML tag, that says "no training". And a few countries need to make it a punishable offense to violate the tag. The punishment should be exceptionally severe, not just a fine. For example: any company that violates the tag should be completely barred from operating, forever.
That will just lead to situations where one company scrapes the site, cleans the content of tags, and sells the data, and another does the training on the precleaned data. The first one hasn't trained and the second one never saw the tag.