this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
99 points (79.6% liked)
Technology
72414 readers
3356 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
These endless "AI bad" articles are annoying. It's just click bait at this point.
Energy use: false. His example was someone using a 13 year old laptop to get a result and then extrapolating energy use from that. Running ai locally is the same energy as playing a 3d AAA game for the same time. No one screams about the energy footprint of playing games.
AAA game development energy use ( thousands of developers all with watt burning gpus spending years creating assets) dwarfs AI model building energy use.
Copyright, yes it's a problem and should be fixed. But stealing is part of capitalism. Google search itself is based on stealing content and then selling ads to find that content. The entire "oh we might send some clicks your way that you might be able to compensated for" is backwards.
His last reason was new and completely absurd: he doesn't like AI because he doesn't like Musk. Given the public hatred between OpenAI and Musk it's bizarre. Yes Musk has his own AI. But Musk also has electric cars, and space travel. Does the author hate all EV's too? If course not, that argument was added by the author as a troll to get engagement.
No, this is just playing into another of the common anti-AI fallacies.
Training an AI does not do anything that copyright is even involved with, let alone prohibited by. Copyright is solely concerned with the copying of specific expressions of ideas, not about the ideas themselves. When an AI trains on data it isn't copying the data, the model doesn't "contain" the training data in any meaningful sense. And the output of the AI is even further removed.
People who insist that AI training is violating copyright are advocating for ideas and styles to be covered by copyright. Or rather by some other entirely new type of IP protection, since as I said this is nothing at all like what copyright already deals with. This would be an utterly terrible thing for culture and free expression in general if it were to come to pass.
I get where this impulse comes from. Modern society has instilled a general sense that everything has to be "owned" by someone, even completely abstract things. Everyone thinks that they're owed payment for everything that they can possibly demand payment for, even if it's something that just yesterday they were doing purely for fun and releasing to the world without a care. There's this base impulse of "mine! Therefore I must control it!" Ironically, it's what leads to the capitalist hellscape so many people are decrying at the same time they demand more.
If a larger youtuber steals the script and content of a video from a smaller youtuber, as far as i know, it wouldnt be illegal. It would hurt the smaller youtuber and benefit the larger one. It would make people mad if they found out about it, but there wouldnt be people who propose changing copyright law to include ideas
I am using youtubers as the example because this happened and a lot of people got angry and its similar to the AI situation
People can complain that something unethical is legal without proposing new copyright laws without flaws
Sure. But that's not what's happening when an AI is trained. It's not "stealing" the script or content of the video, it's analyzing them.
By analyzing, isnt it awarding points based on how well you can replicate it and redoing it in an attempt to obtain more points?
Very basically, yes. But the result is a model that doesn't actually contain the training data, it's too small for it to be physically possible.
Stealing script and content is a copyright violation. It could be a lawsuit but is usually ignored because of legal costs.
By stealing, i meant rewriting it, following the same points but using unique words. Is that illegal or are you referring to completely copying the text?
I thought you meant actual copying like when Linus tech tips used some Gamer's Nexus script word for word.