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

Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 267 posts

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#121

Post by Ukv »

marcosdumay wrote: post #107
Ukv wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would we embrace this now that a computer can do it and there's a level of deniability? Generally I don't think people are arguing that copyright law should be more lenient to AI than it is to humans. If your work gets ripped off (a substantially similar copy not covered by fair use) you can sue regardless of tools used in its creation. Question would be whether machine learning, unlike human learning, should b…

> Question would be whether machine learning, unlike human learning, should be treated as copyright infringement. No, the question is whether those genAI we have around are mass copyrights violation machines or whether they "learn" and build non-violating work. And honestly, I have seen evidence pointing both ways. But the "copyrights protection" institutions are all quickly to decide the point dismissing any evidenc…

> No, the question is whether those genAI we have around are mass copyrights violation machines or whether they "learn" and build non-violating work.

I refer to the training process in question, which may or may not be be violating copyright, as "machine learning" since that's the common terminology. Question is whether that process is covered by fair use. Whether or not it actually "learn"s is not irrelevant, but I'd say more a philosophical framing than a legal one.

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#122

Post by marcosdumay »

solardev wrote: post #50
squigz wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's... really not. Despite what some people seem to think, most of the 3 billion+ Facebook users are normal people who aren't just posting nonsense or memes.

Their algorithm sure does a good job at filtering those normal people out...

Yes, it does. But that doesn't invalidate the GP.

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#123

Post by baby »

trimbo wrote: post #59
mattcantstop wrote: post #16

I am very likely in the minority here, but I think AI SHOULD be trained on everything that is in the public sphere. I'd be disappointed if it wasn't trained on everything they had access to. If it is trained on private information, then I would have issue with it.

I don't agree because it creates this dilemma for creators: you need to put your work out there to get traction, but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. This might even happen without the operator knowing whose work is being ripped off. Commercial art producers have always ripped off minor artists. They would do it by…

Who cares? Don't we want the most absolute intelligence to help human civilization? Credits and creators are below that.

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#124

Post by [deleted] »

autoexec wrote: post #76
trimbo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree because it creates this dilemma for creators: you need to put your work out there to get traction, but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. This might even happen without the operator knowing whose work is being ripped off. Commercial art producers have always ripped off minor artists. They would do it by…

> but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. That's just how the internet works. Don't put something on the internet if you don't want it to be globally distributed and copied. > I personally know two artists who have sued major companies who ripped off their work for ads, and both won million-plus settlements. Ultimatel…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#125

Post by Ekaros »

__loam wrote: post #29
mattcantstop wrote: post #16

I am very likely in the minority here, but I think AI SHOULD be trained on everything that is in the public sphere. I'd be disappointed if it wasn't trained on everything they had access to. If it is trained on private information, then I would have issue with it.

You're probably among friends on this site, but outside tech coded spaces, most people understand that publicly available is not the same thing as an unlimited license to do whatever you want.

This site is weird when you compare it to open source software projects and these same companies selling those as a service on their platforms it is again huge massive problem and exploitation... When the license explicitly allows that, without single legal question.

I wonder if things would be different if software could be copied and then recreated by these models by the mega corps. Would there still be such push in favour of it?

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#126

Post by orthecreedence »

guerrilla wrote: post #82
autoexec wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. That's just how the internet works. Don't put something on the internet if you don't want it to be globally distributed and copied. > I personally know two artists who have sued major companies who ripped off their work for ads, and both won million-plus settlements. Ultimatel…

> That's just how the internet works. Don't put something on the internet if you don't want it to be globally distributed and copied. Or we could be ethical and encourage others to be ethical.

We can encourage profit-driven megacorps to be ethical? Sure, by abolishing them. Otherwise, you're just screaming into the void.

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#127

Post by dewarrn1 »

baby wrote: post #123
trimbo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree because it creates this dilemma for creators: you need to put your work out there to get traction, but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. This might even happen without the operator knowing whose work is being ripped off. Commercial art producers have always ripped off minor artists. They would do it by…

Who cares? Don't we want the most absolute intelligence to help human civilization? Credits and creators are below that.

Creators may disagree.

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#128

Post by baby »

ipaddr wrote: post #65
giobox wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, and in exchange users received rather a lot of services for free... photo and video storage etc as just one example, Llama is free to use, etc etc. While I've no sympathy for mishandling private user data as Meta has of course been guilty of in the past, I think users getting 16 years of free service in exchange for their public posts being used in this fashion is not that bad of a deal.

You get photo/video storage worth a fraction of a cent. Llama doesn't have a free to use service. People got 'free service' in exchange for putting ads around content not for this. It's a terrible deal no one asked the users if they want to agree to. It's visiting a website and saving an image and claiming the website owes you for storage.

Talk for you, I can't imagine what my life would have been without facebook/whatsapp. I've met countless of friends, probably am married to my wife today thanks to it, and without that I wouldn't be able to keep in touch with most of my friends today.

The "facebook is not useful for me so I don't get it" needs to die seriously

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#129

Post by paxys »

trimbo wrote: post #59
mattcantstop wrote: post #16

I am very likely in the minority here, but I think AI SHOULD be trained on everything that is in the public sphere. I'd be disappointed if it wasn't trained on everything they had access to. If it is trained on private information, then I would have issue with it.

I don't agree because it creates this dilemma for creators: you need to put your work out there to get traction, but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. This might even happen without the operator knowing whose work is being ripped off. Commercial art producers have always ripped off minor artists. They would do it by…

There is either copyright violation or there isn't. Like you said, artists can still sue companies for copying their work, AI or not. If the work was transformative enough then, well, what's the problem?

Re: Facebook scraped every Australian adult user's public posts to train AI

#130

Post by mlazos »

trimbo wrote: post #59
mattcantstop wrote: post #16

I am very likely in the minority here, but I think AI SHOULD be trained on everything that is in the public sphere. I'd be disappointed if it wasn't trained on everything they had access to. If it is trained on private information, then I would have issue with it.

I don't agree because it creates this dilemma for creators: you need to put your work out there to get traction, but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. This might even happen without the operator knowing whose work is being ripped off. Commercial art producers have always ripped off minor artists. They would do it by…

> I don't agree because it creates this dilemma for creators: you need to put your work out there to get traction, but if you put your work out there and anything public is fair game, then it will be sampled by a computer and instantly recreated at scale. This might even happen without the operator knowing whose work is being ripped off.

This is no different than the current day, copying already happens (as your friends have seen) AI makes it a little easier but the same legal frameworks cover this - I don’t see why AI stealing is any different than a person doing the same thing. The ability to copy with zero cost was incredibly disruptive and incredibly beneficial to society. Settled case law will catch up and hopefully arrive at the same conclusion it has for human copyright infringement (is it close enough to warrant a case)

Post reply on HN