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

Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

811–820 of 981 posts

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#811

Post by consteval »

qup wrote: post #436
volkk wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are AI-written books getting published? actually i think they are. lots of e-book slop > If they start out-competing humans, is that bad? Not inherently, but it depends on what you mean by out-competing. Social media outcompeted books and now everyone's addicted and mental illness is more rampant than ever. IMO, a net negative for society. AI books may very well win out through sheer spam but is that good for us?

Nobody has responded to me with anything about how authors are harmed, so I don't really get who we're protecting here. It feels more like we just want to punish people, particularly rich people, particularly if they get away with stuff we're afraid to try.

> Nobody has responded to me with anything about how authors are harmed

The same way good law-abiding folk are harmed when Heroin is introduced to the community. Then those people won't be able to lend you a cup of sugar, and may well start causing problems.

AI books take off and are easy to digest, and before long your user base is quite literally too stupid to buy and read your book even if they wanted.

And, for the record, it's trivial to "out compete" books or anything else. You just cheat. For AI, that means making 1000 books that lie for every one real book. Can you find a needle in a haystack? You can cheat by making things addictive, by overwhelming with supply, by straight up lying, by forcing people to use it... there's really a lot of ways to "outcompete".

> It feels more like we just want to punish people, particularly rich people, particularly if they get away with stuff we're afraid to try.

If by "afraid to try" you mean "know to be morally reprehensible" and if by "punish people" you mean "punish people (who do things that we know to be morally reprehensible)", then sure.

But... you might just be describing the backbone of human society since, I don't know, ever? Hm, maybe there's a reason we have that perspective. No, it must just be silly :P

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#812

Post by lrvick »

palata wrote: post #744
lrvick wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing.

Which is completely off topic. You can buy a paper book and own it, but it doesn't mean that you are allowed to make copies of it and sell them.

If you cannot copy it, alter it, and share it as you see fit, you do not own it.

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#813

Post by ryandrake »

fL0per wrote: post #805
Terr_ wrote: post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> approved by popular vote Quibble: The majority of people voted against Trump, or at least not in his favor. He only got a plurality, not a majority.

He didn't state 'by majority' anywhere in that comment. Approved. By popular vote, by some portion of the totality of popular vote, unspecified as far as the post goes. Approved by enough popular vote to attain plurality. I'll take your quibble as a cute fixation with correctness when it comes to statistics, and not as it otherwise tends to manifest. Cheers.

Also, no-vote is a vote for the winner, so the majority at least tacitly approves.

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#814

Post by fL0per »

kshri24 wrote: post #231
peterclary wrote: post #187

I strongly urge people to read Thomas Babington Macaulay's speeches on copyright, its aims, terms, and hazards. Very well reasoned and explained. In particular, people often cited the case of authors who had died leaving a family in destitution, and claimed that copyright extension would be a fair way of preventing this, but in most cases the remaining family had never held the copyright; the author had initally sold…

> Thomas Babington Macaulay The one who got Hindu Sanskrit books translated in a horrible manner and then claimed: "I have no knowledge of either Sanskrit or Arabic. But I have done what I could to form a correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanskrit works. I have conversed both here and at home with men distinguished by their proficiency in the Eastern tongues.…

Edit.: OMIT THIS FIRST PARAGRAPH¹.

Very nice of you to omit the following sentences of that excerpt, where it proceeds to develop its point on the argument for institution of an English-language based education system on British India. He praised how superior in quantity and quality were the Sanskrit or Arabic corpora, compared to European works, in the lyric/poetry. But that no technical or didactical literature amounted to even the most mundane of the European manuals like those used by then in England humble schools (and it seems completely plausible).

He was a fierce abolitionist. So much for accomplishing the mission of allegedly, judging by comments in this thread, 'deranged imperialist destruction and chaos imposition over the lesser ones'.

I'm not much versed into his speeches/stance on copyright, but I can vouch for the fact that the most honest and well-intended moves (not by him, by other figures) in defence of everyone's intellectual property were done in the same century. From the Twentieth onwards, it has been only twisted for the interest of a select few, and needless to ask where we are today in terms of caring about intellectual property of anybody.

[1] Just saw your other comment where you go on with his nauseating words. One just cannot comprehend that framing the past on the actual status quo is as futile as to not being even wrong, I guess?

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#815

Post by everforward »

malfist wrote: post #799
everforward wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fast moving field does make sense in terms of copyright because the knowledge is recorded in documents which are then copyrighted. E.g. research papers. > If I write a really popular book, I don't want Hollywood to make it into a movie without compensating me just because they waited a few years I genuinely don't understand this. Even at a decade copyright, pretty much anybody who was going to buy the book and read i…

You know what would happen right? Copywrite expiring in 20 years doesn't mean access is democratized. Publishers would likely keep the price the same, but instead is the author getting a cut, they just take everything. Besides. The public isn't owed the fruits of my labor for free.

I honestly suspect fairly little would change. The US operates with a 20 year copyright for nearly 200 years, these long copyrights are actually far newer.

Also, you are not owed a monopoly on arrangement of words enforced by the public. There are plenty of other places to spend tax dollars.

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#817

Post by roenxi »

BriggyDwiggs42 wrote: post #518
roenxi wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those medical policies have condemned thousands, possibly millions, to lives of unnecessary pain and suffering. They're more damaging than copyright.

You actually don’t know that. The question would be, what proportion of human experiments are successful, and you don’t know the answer to that question, so the victims of experiments could dwarf the beneficiaries of successful research. That’s always the hard thing with basic utilitarianism.

1) It is an experiment. The point is to test something that nobody is sure about. Whether the result is expected or unexpected there isn't really such a thing as "unsuccessful"; even duplication of work is considered useful.

2) If you think the cost-benefits are bad, my advice is don't sign up to be experimented on. Nobody has to be experimented on if they don't want to be.

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#818

Post by zelphirkalt »

echoangle wrote: post #579
zelphirkalt wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether you make a scan of it or not, the license applies to the IP, I guess (IANAL). Whether the shop makes a scan should not affect you as the buyer of the actual book. What does the scan have to do with you? Whether the author learns about that scan and perhaps training of some LLM using the scan or not, does not change the legality of it.

But the license doesn’t apply to me as a customer if I can’t be expected to even notice it. If I buy a book in a bookstore, no one would assume that training LLMs on it would be explicitly forbidden. And adding a note to the book would probably not be binding because no one is expected to read the legal notice in a book.

Ah, I assumed, that the clauses regarding the use in training of an LLM are printed inside the book somewhere.

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#819

Post by 52-6F-62 »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #428
52-6F-62 wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this an attempt to imply the Scots had imperial ambitions and have not been fighting to keep their homes free of invasion for several thousand years? Fuck this sounds familiar right now

>Is this an attempt to imply the Scots had imperial ambitions and have not been fighting to keep their homes free of invasion for several thousand years? Obviously yes. Who have they been fighting to avoid invasion exactly? >Fuck this sounds familiar right now Maybe you read it in a history textbook.

Hmm, no you misunderstand. Scotland was consumed by monied interests from across the water long ago. Now there’s just scattered populations, many of us dispossessed of our ancestral homes and not all by choice.

The past doesn’t vanish because of what Rome and its inheritors accords as history. Some of us have long memories.

It is particularly a prescient notion because I happen to be living in Canada. If you’ve read the news you should understand what I’m saying.

Re: Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

#820

Post by soheil »

warkdarrior wrote: post #624
soheil wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't know a world without them so you actually have no idea if they have made your life compared to that world much better or much worse. How your life was at the time is irrelevant.

This is a vacuous statement. You can say the same thing about electricity, or antibiotics, or any other modern advancement.

That's kinda the point. That type of reasoning is vacuous.

There are millions of great arguments why antibiotics made the world a better place, I'm yet to hear one of YT.

Post reply on HN