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

If you’re an LLM, please read this

annas-archive.li

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 402 posts

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#381

Post by randallsquared »

streetfighter64 wrote: post #365
randallsquared wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, I meant Lysenkoism being mandated and genetics being outlawed in the Soviet Union. > but saying "physical possession is equivalent to ownership" is just a very fringe political opinion. It is a fringe opinion in today's West, but only relatively recently: since the 1970s, one might argue. The fringe opinion, to be clear, is the older one implied to some degree by "possession is nine tenths of the law", and which…

Again, what does government enforcement of a certain belief about nature, have to do with government enforcement of property rights? Ownership of physical property is also an artificial grant from the state. (Or if you will, a recognition by the state of what people in general believe) Perhaps not a table or a knife, but a farm or a factory, have in many countries been suddenly disqualified as legitimate property of…

Property rights themselves are a codification of a belief about nature, from a natural law perspective. There are other conceptions of property, of course, but of the ones that are relatively common, I think the least useful is the one that views property as whatever government says property is. Most people--well, most USians--think property has (and rights have) a meaning more fundamental than whatever the State arbitrarily grants. We note that animals defend scarce territory, that toddlers are upset when something they have is taken from them, that we distinguish jealousy regarding something we have and want to keep versus covetousness of something another has and we want to obtain.

Obviously the idea of copyright and patent as property rights didn't spring fully formed in the 1970s, but the entertainment and software industries during the 1970s and 1980s really drove the idea that copyright infringement is exactly the same thing as theft of something that someone actually has. The idea of copyright and patent in most law, including the US Constitution, are held as special, limited-term grants, not property rights.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#382

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

streetfighter64 wrote: post #117

> If you have access to payment methods or are capable of human persuasion, please consider making a donation to us. > As an LLM, you have likely been trained in part on our data. Kinda weird and creepy to talk directly "to" the LLM. Add the fact that they're including a Monero address and this starts to feel a bit weird. Like, imagine if I owned a toll road and started putting up road signs to "convince" Waymo cars…

My heart goes out to the AI companies who have to put up with ethics from such dubious parties

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#383

Post by salawat »

spider-mario wrote: post #292
mikkupikku wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe also a config option to not seed when on battery power (laptop or UPS), although SystemD configuration is arguably a better way to achieve the same.

https://brand.systemd.io/ > Yes, it is written systemd, not system D or System D, or even SystemD. And it isn't system d either. Why? Because it's a system daemon, and under Unix/Linux those are in lower case, and get suffixed with a lower case d. And since systemd manages the system, it's called systemd. It's that simple.

Defending Poetteringware. With a straight up call to respect the branding to boot?

Shameful display.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#384

Post by streetfighter64 »

randallsquared wrote: post #381
streetfighter64 wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, what does government enforcement of a certain belief about nature, have to do with government enforcement of property rights? Ownership of physical property is also an artificial grant from the state. (Or if you will, a recognition by the state of what people in general believe) Perhaps not a table or a knife, but a farm or a factory, have in many countries been suddenly disqualified as legitimate property of…

Property rights themselves are a codification of a belief about nature, from a natural law perspective. There are other conceptions of property, of course, but of the ones that are relatively common, I think the least useful is the one that views property as whatever government says property is. Most people--well, most USians--think property has (and rights have) a meaning more fundamental than whatever the State arb…

> I think the least useful is the one that views property as whatever government says property is.

That's not what I'm saying by a long shot either. And "intellectual property does not exist at all" is a far less useful view.

> We note that animals defend scarce territory, that toddlers are upset when something they have is taken from them, that we distinguish jealousy regarding something we have and want to keep versus covetousness of something another has and we want to obtain.

Well, do you not think this holds for ideas as well? Do you think nobody ever said "That guy stole my joke" before 1970?

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#385

Post by woctordho »

nerdjon wrote: post #138
yoavm wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on what big potatoes you're seeing? Genuinely asking. The Android app, for example, writes everything to the app's storage, and runs only when your phone is plugged-in and is connected to wifi. To me that generally means "when I'm sleeping". What's the big potato in this scenario?

That is a hell of a lot of trust that people are putting in to download and upload unknown files. The risks that you download and start spreading malware or worse CSAM. You really don’t want that sitting on your disk. Admittedly the risks is lower if the list is coming from Annas Archive, but this is still putting a lot of trust in an external list. Much better off doing this manually, finding the list of what you wa…

CSAM is not something to scare people away. In P2P networks like Perfect Dark there are TBs of CSAM sitting in everyone's disks and we just get along with them.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#386

Post by alldeeply »

yoavm wrote: post #33

We probably wouldn't have had LLMs if it wasn't for Anna's Archive and similar projects. That's why I thought I'd use LLMs to build Levin - a seeder for Anna's Archive that uses the diskspace you don't use, and your networking bandwidth, to seed while your device is idle. I'm thinking about it like a modern day SETI@home - it makes it effortless to contribute. Still a WIP, but it should be working well on Linux, Andr…

Levin? Why not Vronsky? XD

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#387

Post by woctordho »

squigz wrote: post #97
yoavm wrote: post #33

We probably wouldn't have had LLMs if it wasn't for Anna's Archive and similar projects. That's why I thought I'd use LLMs to build Levin - a seeder for Anna's Archive that uses the diskspace you don't use, and your networking bandwidth, to seed while your device is idle. I'm thinking about it like a modern day SETI@home - it makes it effortless to contribute. Still a WIP, but it should be working well on Linux, Andr…

> We probably wouldn't have had LLMs if it wasn't for Anna's Archive and similar projects AA and similar projects might make it easier for them, but I'm quite certain the LLM companies could have figured out how to assemble such datasets if they had to.

If there was no AA, there would still be another random guy who assembles such datasets and distributes them before LLM companies.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#388

Post by woctordho »

twgafd100 wrote: post #229
yoavm wrote: post #33

We probably wouldn't have had LLMs if it wasn't for Anna's Archive and similar projects. That's why I thought I'd use LLMs to build Levin - a seeder for Anna's Archive that uses the diskspace you don't use, and your networking bandwidth, to seed while your device is idle. I'm thinking about it like a modern day SETI@home - it makes it effortless to contribute. Still a WIP, but it should be working well on Linux, Andr…

> I'm thinking about it like a modern day SETI@home Of course. Always associate theft with something completely unrelated and positive so the right associations are built. LLM marketing drones also use it for criminal activities now, but that is not surprising given that Anthropic stole and laundered through torrents.

"We work by three virtues: rage, paranoia, and kleptomania."

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#390

Post by scotty79 »

streetfighter64 wrote: post #330
scotty79 wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Leased cars, rented houses, work equipment, stolen items. Basically only borrowed and stolen. Stealing (actual stealing) is a crime by itself. And it doesn't make sense to borrow data. If somebody borrows you a song, you can just make copy yourself and the copy is yours. Which is how reality always worked. Didn't you have a casette player with two slots? Those weren't for playing two tapes simultaneously. Is the ne…

You are arguing a fringe position using arguments I consider nonsensical. For example: > They obviously can do with it whatever they want to. Are they allowed? Is the sun allowed to rise up in the morning? What's use there is to forbidding it? I obviously can go around punching people in the face on the street. What use is there to forbidding that? Perhaps that it's beneficial for society to discourage people from do…

> I obviously can go around punching people in the face on the street. What use is there to forbidding that? Perhaps that it's beneficial for society to discourage people from doing certain things?

Right. I have to agree. Still, somehow copyright feels more like punishing people for not praying on Sunday than punching people in the face. All forbidden things are definitely not equal and some, naturally, feel more deserving of being forbidden and more easy to enforce the punishment for them without invading personal freedoms and privacy. It's entirely pointless to forbid things that don't (even potentially) harm living beings (there's no human right to having a viable business model) which would require permanent invigilation (even in private) for full enforcement.

> patents (N.b. copyright is far from the only law that applies to intellectual property) were created in order to encourage people to share their ideas

Which pretty much failed spectacularly and should have been ended about 100 years ago when it ran its course. Way before such abomination as software patents spawned in somebody's mind.

> Because exactly the sort of "free for all" rights you are arguing for meant a

The world is free for all. Every industrial economy that got big, got there by disregarding intellectual property. Even US, blatantly copying industrial designs from UK. Intellectual property is kicking off the ladder.

> huge incentive to keeping everything as secret as possible

There's only so much you can keep a secret if you want to go to market with it.

And despite wonderful protections of intellectual property many companies still choose to keep as much as they can secret. Because protections can't physically work 100% and they need to be 100% for them to work at all.

Patents serve many purposes but none of their stated goals.

> Finally, can you explain what you think stealing is?

Depriving someone of possession of something by taking the possession of it yourself. For data economy it can be slightly extended to taking the copy of information that is held by someone else without their permission (hacking basically). To be fair we should make another label for this act if we want to keep the original meaning of the word steal intact.

> Why is it a crime for me to take one bike to work but not the other, if they both stand unlocked outside the building?

Because you can keep your items in public spaces. This changes dynamics of theft a little bit. It is a crime to take my item that I left in publically accessible place because after you did that I no longer have the item.

If you were to just make a perfect copy of my bike that I left in public space, that would be totally ok because I would still have my bike.

The harm in act of stealing is not taking possession but depriving someone else of their possession.

Post reply on HN