Meta torrented & seeded 81.7 TB dataset containing copyrighted data

Post by palata » Mon, Feb 10, 2025, 11:01 PM UTC

lrvick wrote: post #936

palata wrote: post #908

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not an author, obviously. Do you put all - and I mean 100% - the code you write in the public domain?

I author a lot of technical documentation actually. Even so, yes. I make all my work public, 100%. I use public repositories as my backup for anything I create, regardless of stage of completion and so others can learn from or help improve my work as they see fit. I do not believe proprietary technology should exist and I put my code where my mouth is. Humans progress faster when we collaborate freely. Fork anything…

Post by sanderjd » Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 1:25 AM UTC

roguecoder wrote: post #763

sanderjd wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the concern goes to the point of copyright to begin with, which is to incentive people to create things. Will the inclusion of copyrighted works in llm training (further) erode that incentive? Maybe, and I think that's a shame if so. But I also don't really think it's the primary threat to the incentive structure in publishing.

That is not actually the goal of it. Copyright was invented by publishers (the printing guild) to ensure that the capitalists who own the printing presses could profit from artificial monopolies. It decreases the works produced, on purpose, in order to subsidize publishing. If society decides we no longer want to subsidize publishers with artificial monopolies, we should start with legalizing human creativity. Instea…

Post by sanderjd » Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 1:26 AM UTC

greenie_beans wrote: post #887

sanderjd wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the concern goes to the point of copyright to begin with, which is to incentive people to create things. Will the inclusion of copyrighted works in llm training (further) erode that incentive? Maybe, and I think that's a shame if so. But I also don't really think it's the primary threat to the incentive structure in publishing.

i wrote a book and copyright was not once on my mind. having created something is the incentive to create for most artists

Post by Cub3 » Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 2:18 AM UTC

throwawaygmbno wrote: post #287

gizmo wrote: post #37

Based on the encyclopedic knowledge LLMs have of written works I assume all parties did the same. But I think there is a broader point to make here. Youtube was initially a ghost town (it started as a dating site) and it only got traction once people started uploading copyrighted TV shows to it. Google itself got big by indexing other people's data without compensation. Spotify's music library was also pirated in the…

Everyone on here is smart enough. Just do not participate and save your money. Do not pay for digital goods. If Netflix raises their prices, it doesn't matter because there is a torrent of all of their shows. If Spotify raises their prices, it doesn't matter because your favorite artist has their entire library in a torrent. If some game company ask you to pay real life prices for a digital costume, find the crack on…

Post by nullfield » Tue, Feb 11, 2025, 6:04 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #331

dingnuts wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you want to support an artist go to the show and BUY MERCH at the table! almost all of their income comes from that. the importance of buying a T-shirt at the show cannot be overstated and sometimes you get to say hi to your idol, too

It's a stupid situation, though. There are many creators I'm happy to support - but for 99% of them, I don't want their stupid merch . It's mostly low-quality garbage with high markup, that nevertheless cost something to design and produce, thus wasting both precious resources and labor - an useless tax on contributions to artists that doesn't even help anything. I really wish this wasn't necessary. (Even the okay-qu…