Earlier quoted context omitted.
Says a lot about your character that this is the way you think.
Ok. It's more revealing that the rest of you are so offended by the truth.
The truth of what? Being an utter piece of shit?
X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
201–210 of 217 posts
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Disney would still profit from the MCU films which they produced in the 2010's, but they couldn't stop you from releasing your own Batman vs Spider-Man story. Wouldn't they still have a trademark on those characters though?
The trademark on characters is related to selling goods, if the character is used as a way of identifying an authentic seller. So, if Disney is using mickey mouse on t-shirts to identify it as a Disney manufactured t-shirt, you wouldn't be allowed to use mickey mouse on t-shirts in a similar fashion in a way that might cause consumer confusion about who manufactured the t-shirt. If Wolverine was in the public domain,…
I see, so in that hypothetical world, one could make a spider guy comic book that looks suspiciously like another, but not label it "The Amazing Spiderman (r)"?
Sounds like it would be a boon for things like fan art and fan fiction.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
My uncle has 10x more of everything in the world than he could ever possibly use in his lifetime. A lake house, a main house, a few boats and cars. Elon is somewhere around 10,000x.
The median American net worth is $192,700. Elon’s net worth is $393.4 billion, so if I’m doing math right he’s about 204,000,000x more
I think you might be an order of magnitude off.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#204Earlier 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.
> To be fair, I think he thought he could save us.
Depends on who “us” is. Musk and his close friends? Sure. The rest of us? Well, in his view, the majority of humanity is a stepping stone to a future for his lineage to live on through space travel and colonization. This isn’t an exaggeration, though I don’t have my sources on this handy as it’s been a while so take it with a grain of salt. But Musk’s altruism has largely always been about making himself look good, and less about helping people.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
That’s a very interesting contrarian take right there.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#206Who'd want to steal from that cesspool anyway? Same for reddit, I can't imagine getting reddit memes spit at me from ChatGPT. But yeah, I bet both of them are being used quite liberally.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is definitely the responsibility of anyone suing someone who trained a model on copyrighted data to prove that it isn't fair use, they have to show how it violated law, and while it's in the best interest of those organizations to make things easier for the court by showing why it is fair use, they are technically innocent until proven guilty. Accordingly, anyone on the internet who wants to make comments about ho…
> It is definitely the responsibility of anyone suing someone who trained a model on copyrighted data to prove that it isn't fair use, they have to show how it violated law, and while it's in the best interest of those organizations to make things easier for the court by showing why it is fair use, they are technically innocent until proven guilty. No, fair use is an affirmative defense for conduct that would otherwi…
Thank you, it seems I overstepped here in an effort to be precise. You're right that it is an affirmative defense.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should it be a default? Can you prove that training a model on data you wrote is not fair use? 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…
Yeah, I don't think downloading my paid-for books, from an illegal sharing site, to scrape and make use of, is in any way fair use. From the decision in 1841, in the US (Folsom vs Marsh): > reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work, if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism. On the other hand, it is as clear, that if he thus cites the most im…
Art is highly derivative for the most part, and artists are constantly learning from each other. The jury's out whether this applies to machines. Training an LLM on data is not the same as copying it. As such, the case right now against Meta is wholly focused on the acquisition part and not the training itself.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> The problem is, creating all this AI and advanced technology is directly crushing that world. Do you have a source for this?
This increase: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/
Would not be possible without the continued advancement of technology. Technology allows us to rapidly expand the human population, see all of the healthcare and transportation technology, which has resulted in a vastly higher extinction rate. Pretty much all the damage we have done on earth is only possible due to advanced technology.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 metasta…
In that case I really hope human technology is quite ephemeral and crumbles, because I'd rather have animals have homes than people have technology.