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

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 217 posts

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

#171

Post by threeseed »

api wrote: post #160
threeseed wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost certainly the easter egg found in the Trump "Big Beautiful Bill" which prevents states from enacting AI regulations also came from Musk. That way he can continue to steal from others and lock competitors out whilst being comfortable knowing that no laws will be enacted to prevent it.

We really need a one bill one topic amendment. We are going to get to where there is one bill a year that nobody reads and everything else by executive order, at which point congress is just for show.

And this may sound ridiculous/odd but you need to bring back pork-barrelling i.e. earmarks.

If you allow everyone to go back to their district with something it encourages smaller, more frequent bills and better negotiation.

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

#172

Post by grugagag »

GuB-42 wrote: post #130
lesuorac wrote: post #33

Who's training an AI on the "Tweet" button text? Or are they trying to forgo section 230 protection and claim ownership of content uploaded to the site?

These are just terms of service, not copyright. It means that assuming training AI models is fair use (if it wasn't AI companies including xAI would be in trouble), they can't really stop you. But now, essentially, they are telling you that they can block your account or IP address if you do. Which I believe they can for basically any reason anyways.

How would they know you’re training some LLM though?

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

#173

Post by mrweasel »

SilverBirch wrote: post #159
mrweasel wrote: post #153

It's that like half of Xs business model, selling data to other companies? Right now no one is as data hungry as AI companies, so it seems strange to cut them off. I can understand wanting to charge a premium for the access, if it's for AI, but straight up saying no seems like a strange business move.

How much do you think Musk values X being a viable independent business vs using it accelerate X AI? I would expect Musk values the first as approximately 0 value, and the second as being 100% of the value. So it makes total sense to exploit the fact that X and X AI are the same company.

That's a good point. Other than Meta, X (AI) is the only AI company that "generates" it's own training data and we haven't really seen Musk trying to increase X revenue, of trying to run it cheaper.

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

#174

Post by larrled »

djaychela wrote: post #164
ivape wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

X/Twitter has became extremely prohibitive with just about everything since Elon took over. Their API pricing was antagonistic toward even indie developers. Elon is not a generous guy.

[flagged]

To be fair, I think he thought he could save us. And that it mattered. A narcissistic and paranoid view which happens to be shared by most everyone.

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

#175

Post by numpad0 »

BoxOfRain wrote: post #115
tetris11 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a wild reference! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roko's_basilisk > Roko's basilisk is a thought experiment which states there could be an otherwise benevolent artificial superintelligence (AI) in the future that would punish anyone who knew of its potential existence but did not directly contribute to its advancement or development, in order to incentivize said advancement.

It's Pascal's Wager with a sci-fi reskin, and all the objections that go along with that.

To me, the Wager sounds like a pure philosophical joke, and the Basilisk sounds like a typical cult murder justification. It's not falsifiable, and it explains anything post facto. "xyz was tail of the Basilisk" can pseudo-rationalize anything you want.

I am presently being compelled by future Basilisk to take another slice of cheese. I have no choice but to oblige for fear of my own life :p

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

#176

Post by NekkoDroid »

threeseed wrote: post #92
zombot wrote: post #74

Right, stealing training data from others is OK, having it stolen from you is not. What else is new?

Almost certainly the easter egg found in the Trump "Big Beautiful Bill" which prevents states from enacting AI regulations also came from Musk. That way he can continue to steal from others and lock competitors out whilst being comfortable knowing that no laws will be enacted to prevent it.

> Almost certainly the easter egg found in the Trump "Big Beautiful Bill" which prevents states from enacting AI regulations also came from Musk.

My guess is on Peter Thiel

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

#177

Post by matthewdgreen »

threetonesun wrote: post #156
reaperducer wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Elon is not a generous guy Why would he be? Why shouldn't he be? He has 10x more of everything in the world than he could ever possibly use in his lifetime. Greed is not a virtue.

When twitter became x they switched to basically the same limits Instagram has, I don't think this is a particular failing of Elons, even though he might have many. Restricting content from AI is the big messy debate we're going to see over and over for the next who knows how many years.

Twitter's strategy was to keep the platform very open and inviting, in order to make it relevant. This included having a relatively unrestricted API compared to other platforms.

I don't know if this was successful or not. Ultimately they convinced someone to buy the platform for $44bn, so I guess you can say it was. That buy has locked the platform down more, and the new version certainly feels less culturally central and relevant than it used to.

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

#178

Post by djaychela »

larrled wrote: post #174
djaychela wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

To be fair, I think he thought he could save us. And that it mattered. A narcissistic and paranoid view which happens to be shared by most everyone.

Can you expand on that?as written I can't make much sense of your comment.

FTR I don't think he thought he could save us, I think he thought he could do cool stuff (space and EVs) and now says climate change isn't as bad as he used to think (despite mountains of evidence to the contrary).

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

#179

Post by [deleted] »

djaychela wrote: post #178
larrled wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, I think he thought he could save us. And that it mattered. A narcissistic and paranoid view which happens to be shared by most everyone.

Can you expand on that?as written I can't make much sense of your comment. FTR I don't think he thought he could save us, I think he thought he could do cool stuff (space and EVs) and now says climate change isn't as bad as he used to think (despite mountains of evidence to the contrary).

[deleted]

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

#180

Post by colejohnson66 »

djaychela wrote: post #178
larrled wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, I think he thought he could save us. And that it mattered. A narcissistic and paranoid view which happens to be shared by most everyone.

Can you expand on that?as written I can't make much sense of your comment. FTR I don't think he thought he could save us, I think he thought he could do cool stuff (space and EVs) and now says climate change isn't as bad as he used to think (despite mountains of evidence to the contrary).

If you repeat your lies enough, you'll end up believing them yourself. Especially if you surround yourself with yes-men. It's entirely possible Musk genuinely believed he was a savior of humanity.
Post reply on HN