Skip Navigation

Riskable

@ riskable @programming.dev

Posts
3
Comments
546
Joined
3 yr. ago

Father, Hacker (Information Security Professional), Open Source Software Developer, Inventor, and 3D printing enthusiast

  • FBI arrests judge in escalation of Trump immigration enforcement effort

    Jump

  • Once the non-loyal judges are imprisoned, everyone else who isn't white and Republican will also be on the chopping block.

  • China Cancels 12,000 Metric Tons of US Pork Shipments

    Jump

  • THOSE SWINE!

  • Terror attack in India latest calamity befalling Vance's 'cursed' world tour

    Jump

  • Sorry, Catholics and Indians... It's better for America if the curse of JD Vance stays outside the country.

    Surely, you have some enemies other than us, yes? Send him there.

    Catholics: Please do feel free to send him straight to hell 👍

  • NY Republican headquarters vandalized with swastikas in Albany | “If this is not what you stand for, prove it,” read a separate sign also affixed to the building with duct tape.

    Jump
  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • If you hired someone to copy Ghibli's style, then fed that into an AI as training data, it would completely negate your entire argument.

    It is not illegal for an artist to copy someone else's style. They can't copy another artist's work—that's a derivative—but copying their style is perfectly legal. You can't copyright a style.

    All of that is irrelevant, however. The argument is that—somehow—training an AI with anything is somehow a violation of copyright. It is not. It is absolutely 100% not a violation of copyright to do that!

    Copyright is all about distribution rights. Anyone can download whatever TF they want and they're not violating anyone's copyright. It's the entity that sent the person the copyright that violated the law. Therefore, Meta, OpenAI, et al can host enormous libraries of copyrighted data in their data centers and use that to train their AI. It's not illegal at all.

    When some AI model produces a work that's so similar to an original work that anyone would recognize it, "yeah, that's from Spirited Away" then yes: They violated Ghibli's copyright.

    If the model produces an image of some random person in the style of Studio Ghibli that is not violating anyone's copyright. It is not illegal nor is it immoral. No one is deprived of anything in such a transaction.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I think your understanding of generative AI is incorrect. It’s not just “logic and RNG”...

    If it runs on a computer, it's literally "just logic and RNG". It's all transistors, memory, and an RNG.

    The data used to train an AI model is copyrighted. It's impossible for something to exist without copyright (in the past 100 years). Even public domain works had copyright at some point.

    if any of the training data is copyrighted, then attribution must be given, or at the very least permission to use this data must be given by the current copyright holder.

    This is not correct. Every artist ever has been trained with copyrighted works, yet they don't have to recite every single picture they've seen or book they've ever read whenever they produce something.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I'm still not getting it. What does generative AI have to do with attribution? Like, at all.

    I can train a model on a billion pictures from open, free sources that were specifically donated for that purpose and it'll be able to generate realistic pictures of those things with infinite variation. Every time it generates an image it's just using logic and RNG to come up with options.

    Do we attribute the images to the RNG god or something? It doesn't make sense that attribution come into play here.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • What would happen if bedbugs went extinct? Other than mass celebrations, I mean.

  • Oil executives bluntly criticize Trump tariffs and 'drill, baby, drill' in anonymous survey

    Jump

  • If you wanted stability you shouldn't have backed Trump!

    Did they learn nothing from his last term in office? Actually, we know the answer to that (no, they did not).

    Now I'm beginning to wonder if big, evil corp executives are just as gullible as the rest of the MAGA crowd that regularly vote against their own interests 🤔

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • They created golems powered by compressed air instead of magic.

    Definitely marking this down in my mental, "in case of Isekai" notes.

  • ‘Insecure baby’: Trump draws ridicule after throwing fit over Colorado capitol portrait

    Jump

  • The correct response is to do as he asks... Respectfully remove the painting.

    Then replace it with a picture of an orange baby and put his name on the plaque.

  • Brian Eno: “The biggest problem about AI is not intrinsic to AI. It’s to do with the fact that it’s owned by the same few people”

    Jump

  • If you studied loads of classic art then started making your own would that be a derivative work? Because that's how AI works.

    The presence of watermarks in output images is just a side effect of the prompt and its similarity to training data. If you ask for a picture of an Olympic swimmer wearing a purple bathing suit and it turns out that only a hundred or so images in the training match that sort of image--and most of them included a watermark--you can end up with a kinda-sorta similar watermark in the output.

    It is absolutely 100% evidence that they used watermarked images in their training. Is that a problem, though? I wouldn't think so since they're not distributing those exact images. Just images that are "kinda sorta" similar.

    If you try to get an AI to output an image that matches someone else's image nearly exactly... is that the fault of the AI or the end user, specifically asking for something that would violate another's copyright (with a derivative work)?

  • Brian Eno: “The biggest problem about AI is not intrinsic to AI. It’s to do with the fact that it’s owned by the same few people”

    Jump

  • ...in the same way that someone who's read a lot of books can make money by writing their own.

  • Internet forums are disappearing because now everything is Reddit and Discord. And that's worrying.

    Jump

  • I hate to break this to you but that means you're not normal. If all you ever do in chat is talk about serious things that are of such earth-shattering importance that it would be incredibly rude and obnoxious for someone to post a silent looping video you're not normal, and no fun at all.

    The way Element currently works, it's made for people like you... A strange minority that probably only thinks about "chat" in terms of communicating for an end goal and not for the pleasure of conversation.

  • Brian Eno: “The biggest problem about AI is not intrinsic to AI. It’s to do with the fact that it’s owned by the same few people”

    Jump

  • I wasn't being pedantic. It's a very fucking important distinction.

    If you want to say "unethical" you say that. Law is an orthogonal concept to ethics. As anyone who's studied the history of racism and sexism would understand.

    Furthermore, it's not clear that what Meta did actually was unethical. Ethics is all about how human behavior impacts other humans (or other animals). If a behavior has a direct negative impact that's considered unethical. If it has no impact or positive impact that's an ethical behavior.

    What impact did OpenAI, Meta, et al have when they downloaded these copyrighted works? They were not read by humans--they were read by machines.

    From an ethics standpoint that behavior is moot. It's the ethical equivalent of trying to measure the environmental impact of a bit traveling across a wire. You can go deep down the rabbit hole and calculate the damage caused by mining copper and laying cables but that's largely a waste of time because it completely loses the narrative that copying a billion books/images/whatever into a machine somehow negatively impacts humans.

    It is not the copying of this information that matters. It's the impact of the technologies they're creating with it!

    That's why I think it's very important to point out that copyright violation isn't the problem in these threads. It's a path that leads nowhere.

  • I.R.S. Prepares to Help Find Immigrants Targeted for Deportation

    Jump

  • Internet forums are disappearing because now everything is Reddit and Discord. And that's worrying.

    Jump

  • I meant it as: You can be a man baby and still be correct. The two are not mutually exclusive.

    ...but don't let me stop you from overreacting to random, silly comments said in jest like a man baby 👍

  • Internet forums are disappearing because now everything is Reddit and Discord. And that's worrying.

    Jump

  • Yeah it's probably just a client side issue but the OP mentioned Element, specifically 🤷

    I just wanted to point out that Element is no fun! No fun at all!

    It works and it works great for what it does. Even voice and streaming are great with Element. It's just got a terrible, no-fun interface and pointless limitations on things like looping videos. You can't even configure it to make them play properly (as in, automatic and endlessly, the way they were meant to be played! 😤).

    Looping videos and animated emojis are super fun ways to chat with people. Even in professional settings! It really breaks up the humdrum and can motivate people to chat and share more.

    Element is all serious all the time and going into a chat channel there feels like a chore.

  • Brian Eno: “The biggest problem about AI is not intrinsic to AI. It’s to do with the fact that it’s owned by the same few people”

    Jump

  • Would you say your research is evidence that the o1 model was built using data/algorithms taken from OpenAI via industrial espionage (like Sam Altman is purporting without evidence)? Or is it just likely that they came upon the same logical solution?

    Not that it matters, of course! Just curious.