this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
177 points (100.0% liked)
Fuck AI
3479 readers
764 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's a good thing they are not playing at a club then.
In this analogy, the AI uses books like a remix DJ would use bits and pieces of songs from different tracks to splice together their output. Except in the case of AI, it will be much harder to identify the original source.
Under this definition, it is illegal summarize news articles behind a paywall.
If you made money doing that, it probably would be illegal. You would certainly get sued, in any case.
People make a lot of money summarizing articles behind paywalls and it is generally considered legal as long as it is a summary and not copied text.
Who are you paying for that?
You don't have to pay for fair use.
So how are they making a lot of money then?
Advertisement. You don't have to pay for original content. You just need to pay someone/thing to summarize it and get clicks for advertisement.
I can't say I've ever seen this in my life. Paid advertisement on summaries of paywalled articles. Not something I've come across. Certainly they would be sued if they were found by the companies in question I imagine.
Sure you have. If you ever have read an article that says "As reported in X", that is a summarization of another journalist's work.
Well now I don't think you understand what a summarization is.
I was thinking the same about you.
Have you never used bits and pieces of what other people say or what you've read in books or riffs you’ve heard or styles seen/heard/read when communicating or creating?
Of course. But I'm not a machine churning out an endless spew of those bits and pieces with no further creative input. I'd be on the side of giving any truly conscious entity rights (including creative ones), but LLMs are not, and I don't think ever could be, conscious. That's just not how they work, to my understanding anyway.
If LLMs aren’t conscious, who is using them to churn out an endless spew of those bits and pieces with no further creative input?
Someone has to be doing it. I guess it could be these newfangled AI Agents I’ve been hearing about, but as far as at least I’m aware, they still require input and/or editing (depending on the medium) from a human.
Okay let's take a break here cuz I think we need to point something out. They are absolutely not conscious. By any definition of the word. By any stretch of the imagination. It's important to me that you understand this. What you are describing here is a tool. Not something with consciousness.
I completely agree. Reread what I wrote with that in mind, keeping in mind the context of the comment I replied to.