Live data from Hacker News

X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content

techcrunch.com

31–40 of 217 posts

Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content

#32

How useful is low-quality content like Youtube comments and tweets anyway? Is it a common/important use case to generate tweet-length, tweet-quality content? Are most use cases of generating tweet-type content spam/fraud? Would a model be better off if it was unable to perform those use cases?

Even if SNR is low, there is some information that only exists on X, or at least is the primary source. Just look at how many submissions on HN are X posts.

Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content

#34
post #15

It would be interesting to have a "classical AI model", trained on the contents of the Harvard libraries before 1926 and now out of copyright.

It does surprise me that we haven't seen nations revise their copyright window back to something sensible in a play to seed their own nascent AI industry. The American founding fathers thought 20 years was enough. I'm sure there'd be repercussions in the banking system, but at some point it might be worth the trade.

Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content

#36
post #15

It would be interesting to have a "classical AI model", trained on the contents of the Harvard libraries before 1926 and now out of copyright.

It does surprise me that we haven't seen nations revise their copyright window back to something sensible in a play to seed their own nascent AI industry. The American founding fathers thought 20 years was enough. I'm sure there'd be repercussions in the banking system, but at some point it might be worth the trade.

they can't

a 50 year minimum is part of the berne convention, which itself is as close to a universal law as humanity has

(even North Korea is a signatory)

Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content

#37
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does surprise me that we haven't seen nations revise their copyright window back to something sensible in a play to seed their own nascent AI industry. The American founding fathers thought 20 years was enough. I'm sure there'd be repercussions in the banking system, but at some point it might be worth the trade.

they can't a 50 year minimum is part of the berne convention, which itself is as close to a universal law as humanity has (even North Korea is a signatory)

you can also just ignore the berne convention, and accept whatever consequences there might be

Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content

#38
post #15

It would be interesting to have a "classical AI model", trained on the contents of the Harvard libraries before 1926 and now out of copyright.

It does surprise me that we haven't seen nations revise their copyright window back to something sensible in a play to seed their own nascent AI industry. The American founding fathers thought 20 years was enough. I'm sure there'd be repercussions in the banking system, but at some point it might be worth the trade.

Why would it matter? Copyright has been irrelevant so far.

Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content

#39
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does surprise me that we haven't seen nations revise their copyright window back to something sensible in a play to seed their own nascent AI industry. The American founding fathers thought 20 years was enough. I'm sure there'd be repercussions in the banking system, but at some point it might be worth the trade.

they can't a 50 year minimum is part of the berne convention, which itself is as close to a universal law as humanity has (even North Korea is a signatory)

50 year copyright terms would still be a big improvement over the current state of US copyright law. That would make the first Star Wars public domain in just 2 years.
Post reply on HN