What's funny is that if you go to the linked site that's meant to be a showcase of the design agency's design skills, you'll see that it's ... pretty shit.
Ugly. Random. Thoughtless.
The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
91–100 of 176 posts
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#92A similar thing is happening to me. I worked on something for 3 years which I give away for free to help people and a thief took my software, ran it through ai to rebrand everything and relaunched as their own app. Unfortunately the ai missed a few Easter eggs I had hidden so the theft is undeniable. Google and Apple are useless for dmca unless you have a court order. They refuse to look at or arbitrate. So now I'm o…
Name and shame. I'd be furious if I were one of the thief's tricked customers.
I doubt people that are already systematically stealing material can't hide, or forge arbitrary identities.
Naming and shaming doesn't work for such attack vectors, it's a social strategy for people that have a real identity established and are making money out of that, not for ephemeral identities of such scammers.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#93A similar thing is happening to me. I worked on something for 3 years which I give away for free to help people and a thief took my software, ran it through ai to rebrand everything and relaunched as their own app. Unfortunately the ai missed a few Easter eggs I had hidden so the theft is undeniable. Google and Apple are useless for dmca unless you have a court order. They refuse to look at or arbitrate. So now I'm o…
You can't steal something which is free. This is what you should expect if you give away stuff for free to anybody who happens on it. To me it seems that FOSS people take perverse pleasure in these kind of things. It's easy to prepare for what is ahead: Get yourself out of the filthy FOSS swamp and start charging a fair price for your work from real customers. That is something everybody benefits from and it is also…
"FOSS" doesn't mean that you cannot monetize your program.
It's just that people have taken different routes historically.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#94On the list of things that make this possible, AI comes after the anonymity of web sites and of companies (per another comment, Prompt Digital Inc (DBA Qontour) - which is who exactly?), and the fact that the infringer has complete control over their reach.
The asymmetry between stealing and getting caught or stopped was baked in long before AI, but this will become much more prevalent because the cost of infringing has been reduced by orders of magnitude.
Relatedly, legal copying seems just as problematic: I see both software and media being munged and parroted as soon as it appears, which means innovators do not get the benefit of their innovation. I personally have halted any projects where I can't completely control access to the product, which is a huge damper on innovation.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#95From the article I guess Qontour reproduced the entire text verbatim. > it also includes the entire text of the book, from its opening 800-word foreword to a complete archive of all 311 neologisms... all penned by Koenig. So it doesn't seem likely to me that they asked AI to make a fan site and it spat out the book; instead they asked AI to make a fan site and then copy-pasted the text of the book into it. Perhaps a…
> However, Claude says unfortunately copyright law doesn't work that way. I hate this so much. Not you or your post, just that it’s becoming normal to just throw out “Claude says this” without doing any fact checking. Claude’s also technically right but wrong where it matters. The author could easily offer to settle for control of the site instead of suing. If the author registered the copyright to the book, he doesn…
The “claude says” is the part this pisses me off about LLM use now. If I wanted a Claude answer I’d ask Claude. If I ask a human I want a human response not a “here’s what Claude said”.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't steal something which is free. This is what you should expect if you give away stuff for free to anybody who happens on it. To me it seems that FOSS people take perverse pleasure in these kind of things. It's easy to prepare for what is ahead: Get yourself out of the filthy FOSS swamp and start charging a fair price for your work from real customers. That is something everybody benefits from and it is also…
"FOSS" doesn't mean that you cannot monetize your program. It's just that people have taken different routes historically.
Sell the program or give it away for free, to me both is fine. But to release the source code for free, then complain that other people take it and sell it - that's ridiculous.
If I give away my secret sauce recipe, I have no right to complain if somebody puts it in a bottle and sells it. Either you keep it to yourself or you don't.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly though, even if this is the future what kind of creator is going to participate in that? Why would anyone put effort in substantial ideas that can just be stolen with a click?
Because businesses need to run and make money, I doubt they will just stop building because users can replicate their work easily.
But in this future you described where we can magically one shot stuff, why would anyone use services from businesses and keep paying them? Why not just zero shot it with LLM and keep your money?
Businesses will not keep building if they don't have users, so why would they?
I think you are criminally underrating what goes in a business other than just product or tech. It is extremely hard to write or create a company that makes actual revenue, code/product is maybe 20% of it. Maybe you can say okay so AI will do the remaining 80% of it as well since its so smart. And it might but its even more of a long shot imo.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#98From the article I guess Qontour reproduced the entire text verbatim. > it also includes the entire text of the book, from its opening 800-word foreword to a complete archive of all 311 neologisms... all penned by Koenig. So it doesn't seem likely to me that they asked AI to make a fan site and it spat out the book; instead they asked AI to make a fan site and then copy-pasted the text of the book into it. Perhaps a…
Clause also said you should do your own research rather than repeating what Claude says.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#99From the article I guess Qontour reproduced the entire text verbatim. > it also includes the entire text of the book, from its opening 800-word foreword to a complete archive of all 311 neologisms... all penned by Koenig. So it doesn't seem likely to me that they asked AI to make a fan site and it spat out the book; instead they asked AI to make a fan site and then copy-pasted the text of the book into it. Perhaps a…
> However, Claude says unfortunately copyright law doesn't work that way. I hate this so much. Not you or your post, just that it’s becoming normal to just throw out “Claude says this” without doing any fact checking. Claude’s also technically right but wrong where it matters. The author could easily offer to settle for control of the site instead of suing. If the author registered the copyright to the book, he doesn…
> it’s becoming normal to just throw out “Claude says this” without doing any fact checking.
And without sharing the prompt or the actual response. Like sure, it's possible Claude said something so obviously wrong. Depending on your experience, you might even think it to be probable.
But then why wouldn't OP preempt any doubt and simply share the part that matters? What are we doing.
Re: The Wholesale Plagiarism of Obscure Sorrows
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
then DMCA the entirety of google and alphabet, and tender class action for direct and contributory violation, with the option to back it off to the literary work in question when goog takes a seat at the table and takes it seriously
That costs money
so does loosing a business.