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

191–200 of 217 posts

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

#191

Post by ryeats »

djaychela wrote: post #166
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.

> He has 10x more of everything in the world than he could ever possibly use in his lifetime. Your multiplier is miles off. Not only on basic maths but because he has no idea what to do with all of his wealth other than accrue more and try to prove he's still not the unlikeable teenager he was in SA. Without a rounding error on his wealth he could fix world wide problems such as clean drinking water for everyone. Ins…

Not justify anything he does or does not do but this is clearly not the case since he had to take out loans against equity in his other companies to buy Twitter.

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

#192

Post by thomasanders0n »

ivape wrote: post #136
newsbinator wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Elon is not a generous guy Why would he be?

It's kind of a "life arc" that gets fulfilled when you've done it all and have all the money in the world, and reach a certain age. It's a very traditional arc for a humane human being.

He still has a couple decades to go with his companies I would say.

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

#193

Post by foobarchu »

newsbinator wrote: post #127
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.

> Elon is not a generous guy Why would he be?

Maybe something to do with having built his fortune off the back of taxpayer subsidies?

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

#194

Post by dehrmann »

simiones wrote: post #121
tpxl wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there were no copyright protection, these works wouldn't have been created. Citation needed. You can freely copy and distribute linux and it still got made.

I think Linus Torvalds has been very explicit that he believes the GPL has been critical to the success of Linux - specifically, the copyright-enforced obligation to contribute back any modifications you make. In a world without copyright, companies would be free to make their own modifications and keep them secret, making it more or less impossible to integrate them into a cohesive whole the way they are more or les…

The things that hold modifications back from being upstreamed are getting consensus with the OSS developers and sometimes the internal legal team. Occasionally, the issue is proprietary information. Usually, it's the time commitment or upstream not being interested. What companies don't like doing is maintaining patches on a fork, and that's enough incentive to give back on its own.

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

#195

Post by dehrmann »

mattkevan wrote: post #106
tpxl wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there were no copyright protection, these works wouldn't have been created. Citation needed. You can freely copy and distribute linux and it still got made.

Most of the classic Disney films are based on public domain stories. If there were copyright, those works wouldn’t have been created.

I hadn't put this together, but "The Great Mouse Detective" is a riff on Sherlock Holmes, but that didn't enter the public domain until much later. Would it have been better if it used the character and not just the general vibe?

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

#196

Post by echelon »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #63
echelon wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, no one should train, period. I get that you have your own opinion, but I'm personally tired of living in the butter-churning era and would prefer that this all went a bit faster. I want my real time super high fidelity holo sim, all of my chores to be automatically done, protein folding, drug discovery. The life extension, P = NP future. No more incrementalism. If the universe only happens once, and we're only…

There is already a beautiful, exciting world out there full of animals and plants and we don't need AI or some computer crap to experience it. The problem is, creating all this AI and advanced technology is directly crushing that world.

> There is already a beautiful, exciting world out there full of animals and plants and we don't need AI or some computer crap to experience it.

I'm glad that this works for you, but I want more.

We're temporary apes on a soon to be permanent addition of metallicity to our sun's outer atmosphere. I don't think we should romanticize or hold anything sacred about our very temporary place in the universe.

We are metastable and ephemeral. Everything in this world is.

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

#198

Post by Terr_ »

blibble wrote: post #10

wish I could change my terms to bar training of AI models on my content

I've been wondering if there's some way to put something into legally-defensible clickwrap around one's own content to deter or annoy misuse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42774179

TLDR: Use contract law so that I provide my content and they give me rights to all outputs.

So if anybody doing this can prove Acme Model contains their artwork, and Acme Model was used to generate some scenes used in a major movie, then Acme has already given the artist a right to share/resell those scenes. If Acme Inc. "sold" exclusive rights to a movie-studio, then either (A) they broke the contact with every contributor, or (B) they lied to the studio in that other contract.

Remember, the goal isn't some amazing "gotcha" where the latest blockbuster movie becomes public domain, but rather to create chronic legal pain and risk for companies like Acme so that they stop stealing stuff.

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

#199

Post by teeray »

anticensor wrote: post #148
yndoendo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

However the loser pays vs. both parties pay isn't uniform across all possible lawsuit types even in America or in England. Adding to that, even in loser pays regimes, both parties have to pay upfront and then the winner is refunded the costs.

> both parties have to pay upfront and then the winner is refunded the costs.

Exactly. It’s about which party can sustain the greater cash flow.

Post reply on HN