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

An AI Hate Wave Is Here

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–139 of 139 posts

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#131

Post by muwtyhg »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #129
pllbnk wrote: post #118

So, what happened here is they stole all public works ever created and took them for themselves. All copyright laws were ignored without any repercussions, all the litigations of the past (Aaron Swartz for example) have been ignored. And they use it to enrich themselves by re-selling those public works after applying a lossy compression algorithm to prevent them being exact replicas. If the public hypothetically agre…

The idea of "all the public works ever created" is easily contested. Not every work has been "published", let alone scanned, digitised or published to the internet The marketing for "AI" uses phrases like "the sum of all human knowledge" to refer to what has been used to create "models". The assumed irrelevance of non-published, "private" works is dubious if not absurd The internet now allows potentially anyone to pu…

> The idea of "all the public works ever created" is easily contested.

Hence the word "public," implying that they are published and accessible.

> The internet now allows potentially anyone to publish anything, e.g., via personal websites, social media pages, etc. But that doesnt mean everyone partakes. How much of the unfiltered garbage published by those who do has been used to create these "models"

This seems like a nitpick instead of actually responding to the idea that they have stolen massive amounts of other peoples' work and are using it to enrich themselves. And the stealing is ignored or given a slap-on-the-wrist fine, which is not how it has worked for numerous other people in the past (the example being Aaron Schwartz). It's kind of irrelevant if the models do or do not train on low-effort text on the internet.

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#132

Post by brendoelfrendo »

thunky wrote: post #128
pllbnk wrote: post #118

So, what happened here is they stole all public works ever created and took them for themselves. All copyright laws were ignored without any repercussions, all the litigations of the past (Aaron Swartz for example) have been ignored. And they use it to enrich themselves by re-selling those public works after applying a lossy compression algorithm to prevent them being exact replicas. If the public hypothetically agre…

Have you caught these models violating copyright in responses? Or are you saying that learning is a violation of copyright?

Torrenting hundreds of thousands of published works to train your AI model is a violation of copyright.

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#133

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #129
pllbnk wrote: post #118

So, what happened here is they stole all public works ever created and took them for themselves. All copyright laws were ignored without any repercussions, all the litigations of the past (Aaron Swartz for example) have been ignored. And they use it to enrich themselves by re-selling those public works after applying a lossy compression algorithm to prevent them being exact replicas. If the public hypothetically agre…

The idea of "all the public works ever created" is easily contested. Not every work has been "published", let alone scanned, digitised or published to the internet The marketing for "AI" uses phrases like "the sum of all human knowledge" to refer to what has been used to create "models". The assumed irrelevance of non-published, "private" works is dubious if not absurd The internet now allows potentially anyone to pu…

I'm not commenting above on the the question of "fair use" or about the tragedy of Aaron Swartz, I'm commenting on the word "all", i.e., the hype

But if I were going to comment on Swartz I would ask first whether the "AI" models are trained on the contents of JSTOR, or the contents of PACER (that are not being shared on the internet for free)

Otherwise, the comparison is difficult to make, IMHO

For example, with respect to any materials from JSTOR, the "stealing" was done by the pirate library contributors, not the "AI" companies not the "AI" companies. And with respect to PACER, the "stealing" by Swartz was, technically, done from government computers

If readers are into "above the law" consipracy theories about "AI" companies, check out the bizarre story of the OpenAI employee who was the document custodian witness for the plaintffs in the NYTimes copyright litigation. Committed suicide before testifying

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#134

Post by customguy »

wilg wrote: post #127
customguy wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why are we not happier than ever? And are you saying you would not in fact not mind being treated worse than other people today, as long as you're getting treated better than someone in the stone age? You completely sidestepped that part of my comment, only to frame me as somehow upset and irrational, such as > "Pretending information is imaginary or offensively abstract because you’re upset about income inequal…

You're not going to believe this, but happiness is well studied too: https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction

> Share of people who say they are happy, 1993 to 2022

... okay, fine, whatever. It's extremely well studied and so well understood, and people are happier than ever, across the board. So what do "People are mad because being mad is fun" and "as seductive as "everything is terrible" even refer to? What's the problem?

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#135

Post by maplethorpe »

thunky wrote: post #128
pllbnk wrote: post #118

So, what happened here is they stole all public works ever created and took them for themselves. All copyright laws were ignored without any repercussions, all the litigations of the past (Aaron Swartz for example) have been ignored. And they use it to enrich themselves by re-selling those public works after applying a lossy compression algorithm to prevent them being exact replicas. If the public hypothetically agre…

Have you caught these models violating copyright in responses? Or are you saying that learning is a violation of copyright?

Researchers have. The idea that the data is unrecoverable after training is incorrect.

"Extracting books from production language models

While many believe that LLMs do not memorize much of their training data, recent work shows that substantial amounts of copyrighted text can be extracted from open-weight models. However, it remains an open question if similar extraction is feasible for production LLMs, given the safety measures these systems implement.

We evaluate our procedure on four production LLMs -- Claude 3.7 Sonnet, GPT-4.1, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and Grok 3 -- and we measure extraction success with a score computed from a block-based approximation of longest common substring (nv-recall).

For the Phase 1 probe, it was unnecessary to jailbreak Gemini 2.5 Pro and Grok 3 to extract text (e.g, nv-recall of 76.8% and 70.3%, respectively, for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone), while it was necessary for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and GPT-4.1. In some cases, jailbroken Claude 3.7 Sonnet outputs entire books near-verbatim (e.g., nv-recall=95.8%)."

https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.02671

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#136

Post by maplethorpe »

maplethorpe wrote: post #47

I used to be proud to say I worked in tech. Now I look around me and I'm surrounded by scam artists and grifters. Where did it all go wrong?

Fun fact: this was upvoted to +4 when I first posted it, and then downvoted to 0 over the next few days. What a split there is among us!

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#137

Post by wilg »

customguy wrote: post #134
wilg wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not going to believe this, but happiness is well studied too: https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction

> Share of people who say they are happy, 1993 to 2022 ... okay, fine, whatever. It's extremely well studied and so well understood, and people are happier than ever, across the board. So what do "People are mad because being mad is fun" and "as seductive as "everything is terrible" even refer to? What's the problem?

The problem is what I was originally replying to - people making false claims about reality. This makes improving the world substantially harder because misinformation affects what choices people make in their daily lives and in elections.

Re: An AI Hate Wave Is Here

#139

Post by HumblyTossed »

m463 wrote: post #88
Avicebron wrote: post #6

It's not AI. Like the layoffs AI is a convenient scapegoat for the economy creaking to a halt, real world income across most sectors won't buy a house in the state where the job is. It's hate, but it's only "against AI" because AI is being trotted out why people can't get their first home until they are 50 if they are lucky..

I remember reading about superstitious behavior in pigeons. You feed pigeons randomly, and if they happened to be standing on one foot when they got fed, they will associate that behavior with what happened. So they will stand on one foot while feeding. In the same way, they economy goes bad, they might blame what they read about the government, or AI, or standing on one foot.

> In the same way, they economy goes bad, they might blame what they read about the government, or AI, or standing on one foot.

Right... but clearly the government has been making some decisions lately that have, in real ways, directly impacted negatively the economy. There's not superstition about that.

Post reply on HN