371–380 of 461 posts
This whole argument rests on the absurd assumption that you can "own" a voice as if it's property. Does this mean people can own the patterns of vibration in air? It's completely nonsensical.
Intellectual property is, in fact, recognized by many legal jurisdictions. And audio works are typically included in that. However, in this situation, the right of publicity is probably more applicable.
Everyone has their own fears about AI, but my fears are especially chilling; what if AI was used to imitate a person saying something blasphemeous? My country is already has blasphemy lynching mobs based on the slightest perceived insult, real or imagined. They will mob you, lynch you, burn your corpse, then distribute sweets while you family hide and issue video messages denouncing you and forgiving the mob. And thi…
This whole argument rests on the absurd assumption that you can "own" a voice as if it's property. Does this mean people can own the patterns of vibration in air? It's completely nonsensical.
Ownership as a whole is a social/legal construct, no? [1] You only "own" something insofar as you control it. Societies build frameworks that aid people in controlling things based on who they think deserves control of those things. This clearly can vary widely between societies; the USA used to think owning people was perfectly OK and some places still do. Nobody has absolute control over (almost?) anything, and I t…
Social/legal constructs like owning ideas or the sound of a voice exist not because they make any sort of logical sense, they exist to give privilege and power to certain groups at the expense of others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
America also has laws against taking guns into theaters and indiscriminately shooting people, once you have easy access to guns the gun becomes a potential solution to problems. Maybe Switzerland just has less problems where that potential solution appeals to people.
I'd say that the key difference is that Switzerland has compulsory military service in which you're taught how to operate a weapon properly. Therefore, everyone that has one has gone through months of training. Vs the US, where there are loopholes that you can use to avoid even a basic background check, and then use it for the very first time to shoot someone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't nuke your account. You can close it but your comments remain on the site. They'll delete your account and assign your comments and posts to a random username. Yes this violates any EU citizen's right to be forgotten under GDPR. Welcome to silicon valley.
Does every comment previously attached to your account have a unique username or do they still all share the same? Sort of moot point considering the multiple HN archives that would still have the original username attached
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An individual is not responsible for the culture or government in the country they live in. In the UK a government was just elected with a historical absolute majority by only ten million people, and now first time offenders are being sent to prison for making stupid offensive statements online.
Are you referring to this case? > In a now deleted post on her X account, Mrs Connolly, from Northampton, wrote: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f*** hotels full of the bastards for all I care… If that makes me racist, so be it. > The court heard Kay copied, pasted and uploaded Mrs Connolly’s post at 12.27pm on Wednesday from a BBC News report and added the hashtags #standwithlucyconnolly #lucyconnolly #f*…
My point was that AI faked content could certainly get you locked up in the UK.
Everyone has their own fears about AI, but my fears are especially chilling; what if AI was used to imitate a person saying something blasphemeous? My country is already has blasphemy lynching mobs based on the slightest perceived insult, real or imagined. They will mob you, lynch you, burn your corpse, then distribute sweets while you family hide and issue video messages denouncing you and forgiving the mob. And thi…
> what if AI was used to imitate a person saying something blasphemeous? > My country is already has blasphemy lynching mobs in your case the problem is not AI, it’s your country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, im sure lots of people have written a lot of random stuff on a lot of forums that should absolutely stay anonymous from gossip to family secrets to honesty about career/workplace and what not. If stylometric analysis runs on all comments on the internet then yeah. Bad things will happen, very very bad. I honestly think it should be at least illegal to do this kind of analysis because it'll be a treasure trove fo…
Stuff like this is why I tell everyone who does good work in the AI space to remember that they are watched
So far I get a lot of pushback and statements like "it's just linear algebra" and "quality doesn't matter, it's quantity. Just scale. That's the bitter lesson". The former tells me they know very little linear algebra and the latter tells me they know very little about probability distribution and the concept of coverage... I routinely see papers get awards and tens of thousands of citations when they're making errors I would expect undergrads in my classes to do better at... I think a big reason I'm frustrated is that supposedly we share the same goals -- building AGI -- but I'm told I'm stopping them from doing so while they reject my papers and theirs gets accepted... (Fwiw I'm happy to accept scale papers. There should be a wide range of ideas explored. But I'm upset that we're on a railroad and any deviation from that is considered heresy)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why should child porn be illegal? It's just a pattern of bits on a computer!" Describing a reasonable legal principle in terms of physics phenomena does not make it unreasonable.
You're missing the point. Ownership implies the resource is scarce. If the resource is a pattern, which cannot be physically owned and my usage of the pattern doesn't prevent others from using the pattern, it's nonsensical to say it can be owned by anybody.
This is a good thing, even though your comic is nothing but a bunch of JPGs--digital patterns--that can be copied infinitely without depriving anyone.
Voice-reproduction rights can get complicated in the AI age, and I don't claim to have the objective moral truth. But there are very good reasons to give legal protection to the creators of digital patterns, as a general principle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What country is immune to this? As far as I can tell the collective conscious of every country is swayed by propaganda. A written headline is enough to incite rage in any country much less a voice or video indistinguishable from the real thing. Folks in “developed’ countries have their lives destroyed or ended all the time based on rumors of something said or done.
Any country that doesn't have executions by mobs. Used to be most nordic countries. Till they changed their immigration policies.