this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
514 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

67422 readers
3660 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 news or articles.
  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] 181 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I hope this is gonna become a new meme template

[–] [email protected] 92 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She looks like she just talked to the waitress about a fake rule in eating nachos and got caught up by her date.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 1 year ago (1 children)

this is incomprehensible to me. can you try it with two or three sentences?

[–] [email protected] 81 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Her date was eating all the fully loaded nachos, so she went up and ask to the waitress to make up a rule about how one person cannot eat all the nacho with meat and cheese. But her date knew that rule was bullshit and called her out about it. She's trying to look confused and sad because they're going to be too soon for the movie.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 year ago

What?! What the hell are you talking about?!

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not sure what's funnier. your first comment or the comment explaining it to someone who obviously not part of a turbo team

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Lmao that's wonderful, scrolling down from those weird ass comments only to be greeted by my own exact facial expression.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

thank you. it must be a reference to something, but i don't watch tv any more.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I think you should leave...

(is what you would search to find this)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Chatgpt, you okay? 😅

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 134 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They know what they fed the thing. Not backing up their own training data would be insane. They are not insane, just thieves

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 100 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Gee, seems like something a CTO would know. I'm sure she's not just lying, right?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 91 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is no way in hell it isn’t copyrighted material.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Every video ever created is copyrighted.

The question is — do they need a license? Time will tell. This is obviously going to court.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago

Don't downvote this guy. He's mostly right. Creative works have copyright protections from the moment they are created. The relevant question is indeed if they have the relevant permissions for their use, not wether it had protections in the first place.

Maybe some surveillance camera footage is not sufficiently creative to get protections, but that's hardly going to be good for machine reinforcement learning.

[–] iknowitwheniseeit 15 points 1 year ago

There are definitely non copyrighted videos! Both old videos (all still black and white I think) and also things released into the public domain by copyright holders.

But for sure that's a very small subset of videos.

[–] [email protected] 69 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If I were the reporter my next question would be:

"Do you feel that not knowing the most basic things about your product reflects on your competence as CTO?"

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Hilarious, but if the reporter asked this they would find it harder to get invites to events. Which is a problem for journalists. Unless your very well regarded for your journalism, you can't push powerful people without risking your career.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

I almost want to believe they legitimately do not know nor care they‘re committing a gigantic data and labour heist but the truth is they know exactly what they‘re doing and they rub it under our noses.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago

Of course they know what they’re doing. Everybody knows this, how could they be the only ones that don’t?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

Yeah, the fact that AI progress just relies on "we will make so much money that no lawsuit will consequently alter our growth" is really infuriating. The fact that general audience apparently doesn't care is even more infuriating.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 year ago (6 children)

This tellls you so much what kind of company OpenAI is

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

An Intelligence piracy company?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 year ago (3 children)

CTO should definitely know this.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago

They do know this. They're avoiding any legal exposure by being vague.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Did they intentionally chose a picture where she looks like she's morphing into Elon?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was thinking mads mikkelssen

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Funny she didn't talked it out with lawyers before that. That's a bad way to answer that.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Or she talked and the lawyers told her to pretend ignorance.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago

Then wipe it out and start again once you have where your data is coming from sorted out. Are we acting like you having built datacenter pack full of NVIDIA processors just for this sort of retraining? They are choosing to build AI without proper sourcing, that's not an AI limitation.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

REPORTER: Where does your data come from?

CTO: Bitch, are you trying to get me sued?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (15 children)

I don't think so. They aren't reproducing the content.

I think the equivalent is you reading this article, then answering questions about it.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Idk why this is such an unpopular opinion. I don't need permission from an author to talk about their book, or permission from a singer to parody their song. I've never heard any good arguments for why it's a crime to automate these things.

I mean hell, we have an LLM bot in this comment section that took the article and spat 27% of it back out verbatim, yet nobody is pissing and moaning about it "stealing" the article.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (19 children)

Watching a video or reading an article by a human isn't copyright infringement, why then if an "AI" do it then it is? I believe the copyright infringement it's made by the prompt so by the user not the tool.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you read an article, then copy parts of that article into a new article, that's copyright infringement. Same with ais.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Drewelite 20 points 1 year ago (5 children)

This is what people fundamentally don't understand about intelligence, artificial or otherwise. People feel like their intelligence is 100% "theirs". While I certainly would advocate that a person owns their intelligence, It didn't spawn from nothing.

You're standing on the shoulders of everyone that came before you. You take a prehistoric man or an alien that hasn't had any of the same experiences you've had, they won't be able to function in this world. It's not because they are any dumber than you. It's because you absorbed the hive mind of the society you live in. Everyone's racing to slap their brand on stuff to copyright it to get ahead and carve out their space.

"No you can't tell that story, It's mine." "That art is so derivative."

But copyright was only meant to protect something for a short period in order to monetize it; to adapt the value of knowledge for our capital market. Our world can't grow if all knowledge is owned forever and isn't able to be used when even THINKING about new ideas.

ANY VERSION OF INTELLIGENCE YOU WOULD WANT TO INTERACT WITH MUST CONSUME OUR KNOWLEDGE AND PRODUCE TRANSFORMATIONS OF IT.

That's all you do.

Imagine how useless someone would be who'd never interacted with anything copyrighted, patented, or trademarked.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Mira Murati, OpenAI's longtime chief technology officer, sat down with The Wall Street Journal's Joanna Stern this week to discuss Sora, the company's forthcoming video-generating AI.

It's a bad look all around for OpenAI, which has drawn wide controversy — not to mention multiple copyright lawsuits, including one from The New York Times — for its data-scraping practices.

After the interview, Murati reportedly confirmed to the WSJ that Shutterstock videos were indeed included in Sora's training set.

But when you consider the vastness of video content across the web, any clips available to OpenAI through Shutterstock are likely only a small drop in the Sora training data pond.

Others, meanwhile, jumped to Murati's defense, arguing that if you've ever published anything to the internet, you should be perfectly fine with AI companies gobbling it up.

Whether Murati was keeping things close to the vest to avoid more copyright litigation or simply just didn't know the answer, people have good reason to wonder where AI data — be it "publicly available and licensed" or not — is coming from.


The original article contains 667 words, the summary contains 178 words. Saved 73%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›