this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
778 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

66353 readers
4525 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 44 minutes ago

The only way this would be ok is if openai was actually open. make the entire damn thing free and open source, and most of the complaints will go away.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 49 minutes ago

over it is then. Buh bye!

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Why does Sam have such a punchable face?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 hour ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 40 minutes ago (1 children)

let's have a tier list of billionaires by face punchability.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 minutes ago (1 children)

my top 3:

#1 Elon Musk

#2 Mark Zuckerberg

#3 Jeff Bezos

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 minutes ago* (last edited 6 minutes ago)

I hate zuckerburg as much as anyone, but I find his face surprisingly low on the punchability index. Musk and Bezos at 1 and 2 for me.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago

Yeah but his especially, it's so squishy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 41 minutes ago

Cosmic justice?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 hour ago

Business that stole everyone's information to train a model complains that businesses can steal information to train models.

Yeah I'll pour one out for folks who promised to open-source their model and then backed out the moment the money appeared... Wankers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 minutes ago

Perhaps this is just a problem with the way the model works. Always requiring new data and unable to use current data, to ponder and expand upon while making new connections about ideas that influenced the author… LLM’s are a smoke and mirrors show, not a real intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 27 minutes ago

yeah thats crazy

[–] [email protected] 97 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

But I can't pirate copyrighted materials to "train" my own real intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Now you get why we were all told to hate AI. It's a patriot act for copywrite and IP laws. We should be able too. But that isn't where our discussions were steered was it

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 hours ago

It's copyright, not copywrite---you know, the right to copy. Copywriting is what ad people do. And what does this have to do with the PATRIOT Act?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 4 hours ago (6 children)

Copyrights should have never been extended longer than 5 years in the first place, either remove draconian copyright laws or outlaw LLM style models using copyrighted material, corpos can't have both.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 minutes ago* (last edited 3 minutes ago)

I think copyright lasting 20 years or so is not unreasonable in our current society. I'd obviously love to live in a society where we could get away with lower. As a compromise, I'd like to see compulsory licensing applied to all written work. (E.g., after n years, anyone can use it if they pay royalties and you can't stop them; the amount of royalties gradually decreases until it's in the public domain.)

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Bro, what? Some books take more than 5 years to write and you want their authors to only have authorship of it for 5 years? Wtf. I have published books that are a dozen years old and I'm in my mid-30s. This is an insane take.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The one I thought was a good compromise was 14 years, with the option to file again for a single renewal for a second 14 years. That was the basic system in the US for quite a while, and it has the benefit of being a good fit for the human life span--it means that the stuff that was popular with our parents when we were kids, i.e. the cultural milieu in which we were raised, would be public domain by the time we were adults, and we'd be free to remix it and revisit it. It also covers the vast majority of the sales lifetime of a work, and makes preservation and archiving more generally feasible.

5 years may be an overcorrection, but I think very limited terms like that are closer to the right solution than our current system is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 minutes ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago)

Exactly! That's what we had originally in the US, and I thought that was more than fair. I would add that the renewal should only be awarded if they can prove they need more time to recoup R&D costs and it's still available commercially.

So yeah, something in the neighborhood of 10-15 years w/ a renewal sounds totally fair to me. Let them keep the trademarks and whatnot as long as they're in use (e.g. you shouldn't be able to make a new entry in a series w/o the author's permission for the marks, but fanfic that explicitly mentions it's not original/canon would probably fall under fair use), but the actual copyright should expire very quickly.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 hours ago (4 children)

You don't have to stop selling when a book becomes public domain, publishers and authors sell public domain/commons books frequently, it's just you won't have a monopoly on the contents after the copyright expires.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (3 children)

I agree that copyright is far too long, but at 5 years there's hardly incentive to produce. You could write a novel and have it only starting to get popular after 5 years.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

Thanks that's very insightful and I'll amend my position to 15 years 5 may be just a little zealous. 100 year US copyrights have been choking innovation due to things like Disney led trade group lobbyists, 15 years would be a huge boost to many creators being able to leverage more IPs and advancements being held in limbo unused or poorly used by corpo entities.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

the issue is that foreign companies aren't subject to US copyright law, so if we hobble US AI companies, our country loses the AI war

I get that AI seems unfair, but there isn't really a way to prevent AI scraping (domestic and foreign) aside from removing all public content on the internet

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

I think 5 years is a bit short.

[–] [email protected] 93 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

"We can't succeed without breaking the law. We can't succeed without operating unethically."

I'm so sick of this bullshit. They pretend to love a free market until it's not in their favor and then they ask us to bend over backwards for them.

Too many people think they're superior. Which is ironic, because they're also the ones asking for handouts and rule bending. If you were superior, you wouldn't need all the unethical things that you're asking for.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

It's so wild how laws just have no idea what to do with you if you just add one layer of proxy. "Nooo I'm not stealing and plagerizing, it's the AI doing it!"

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 hours ago

If I'm using "AI" to generate subtitles for the "community" is ok if i have a large "datastore" of "licensable media" stored locally to work off of right?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 4 hours ago

Good.

Fuck Sam Altman's greed. Pay the fucking artists you're robbing.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 5 hours ago

So pirating full works for commercial use suddenly is "fair use", or what? Lets see what e.g. Disney says about this.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

What if we had taken the billions of dollars invested in AI and invested that into public education instead?

Imagine the return on investment of the information being used to train actual humans who can reason and don’t lie 60% of the time instead of using it to train a computer that is useless more than it is useful.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 hours ago

Where are the copyright lawsuits by Nintendo and Disney when you need them lol

[–] [email protected] 28 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

So pirating full works suddenly is fair use, or what?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

If your business model only works if you break the Law, that mean's you're just another Organised Crime group.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›