Technology

72895 readers

2988 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
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.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

572

The AI-focused COPIED Act would make removing digital watermarks illegal (as well as training any kind of AI on copyrighted content) (www.theverge.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

177 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A bipartisan group of senators introduced a new bill to make it easier to authenticate and detect artificial intelligence-generated content and protect journalists and artists from having their work gobbled up by AI models without their permission.

The Content Origin Protection and Integrity from Edited and Deepfaked Media Act (COPIED Act) would direct the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to create standards and guidelines that help prove the origin of content and detect synthetic content, like through watermarking. It also directs the agency to create security measures to prevent tampering and requires AI tools for creative or journalistic content to let users attach information about their origin and prohibit that information from being removed. Under the bill, such content also could not be used to train AI models.

Content owners, including broadcasters, artists, and newspapers, could sue companies they believe used their materials without permission or tampered with authentication markers. State attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission could also enforce the bill, which its backers say prohibits anyone from “removing, disabling, or tampering with content provenance information” outside of an exception for some security research purposes.

(A copy of the bill is in he article, here is the important part imo:

Prohibits the use of “covered content” (digital representations of copyrighted works) with content provenance to either train an AI- /algorithm-based system or create synthetic content without the express, informed consent and adherence to the terms of use of such content, including compensation)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

They’re ‘taking inspiration’ if you will, transforming it into something completely different.

That is not at all what takes place with A.I.

An A.I. doesn't "learn" like a human does. It aggregates multiple chunks from multiple sources. It's just really really tiny chunks so it's hard to tell sometimes.

That's why you can ask two AI's to write a story based on the same prompt and some of their lines will be exactly the same. Because it's not taking inspiration from, it's literally copying bits and pieces of other works and it happens that they both chose that particular bit.

If you do that when writing a paper in university it's called plagerism.

Get the fuck out of here with your "A.I. takes inspiration.." it copies nothing more. It doesn't add anything new to the sum total of the creative zeitgeist because it's just remixes of things that already exist.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

You just reiterate what other anti-ML extremists have said like a sad little parrot. No, LLMs don't just copy. They network information and associations and can output entirely new combinations of them. To do this, they make use of neural networks, which are computational concepts analogous to the way your brain works. If, according to you, LLMs just copy, then that's all that you do as well.

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

Consider youtube poop, Im serious. Everyclip in them is sourced from preexisting audio and video, and mixed or distorted in a comedic format. You could make an AI to make youtube poops using those same clips and other "poops" as training data. What it outputs might be of lower quality, but in a technical sense it would be made in an identical fashion. And, to the chagrin of Disney, Nintendo, and Viacom, these are considered legally distinct entities; because I dont watch Frying Nemo in place of Finding Nemo. So why would it be any different when an AI makes it?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

You can do the same thing with the Hardy Boys. You can find the same page word for word in different books. You can also do that with the Bible. The authors were plagiarizing each other.

It doesn’t add anything new to the sum total of the creative zeitgeist because it’s just remixes of things that already exist.

Do yourself a favor and never ever go into design of infrastructure equipment or eat at a Pizza Hut or get a drink from Starbucks or work for an American car company or be connected to Boeing.

Everyone has this super impressive view of human creativity and I am waiting to see any of it. As far as I can tell the less creative you are the more success you will have. But let me guess you ride a Segway, wear those shoes with toes, have gone through every recipe of Julia Childs, and compose novels that look like Finnegan's Wake got into a car crash with EE Cummings and Gravity's Rainbow.

Now leave me alone with I eat the same burger as everyone else and watch reruns of Family Guy in my house that looks like all the other ones on the street