this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
1240 points (96.5% liked)

Technology

59421 readers
2842 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 57 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (35 children)

And using publicly available data to train gets you a shitty chatbot...

Hell, even using copyrighted data to train isn't that great.

Like, what do you even think they're doing here for your conspiracy?

You think OpenAI is saying they should pay for the data? They're trying to use it for free.

Was this a meta joke and you had a chatbot write your comment?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (22 children)

The point that was being made was that public available data includes a whole lot amount of copyrighted data to begin with and its pretty much impossible to filter it out. Grand example, the Eiffel tower in Paris is not copyright protected, but the lights on it are so you can only using pictures of the Eiffel tower during the day, if the picture itself isn't copyright protected by the original photographer. Copyright law has all these complex caveat and exception that make it impossible to tell in glance whether or not it is protected.

This in turn means, if AI cannot legally train on copyrighted materials it finds online without paying huge sums of money then effectively only mega corporation who can pay copyright fines as cost of business will be able to afford training decent AI.

The only other option to produce any ai of such type is a very narrow curated set of known materials with a public use license but that is not going to get you anything competent on its own.

EDIT: In case it isn't clear i am clarifying what i understood from [email protected] comment, not adding to it.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I didn't want any of this shit. IDGAF if we don't have AI. I'm still not sure the internet actually improved anything, let alone what the benefits of AI are supposed to be.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

A perfectly valid stance to take.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)