96 replies to this topic

[dasmo]

This will be interesting because it’s a flawed take. Reading and learning can’t be protected by copyright. That’s not the intent. Even if it’s a machine.

[Ismo07]

This will be interesting because it’s a flawed take. Reading and learning can’t be protected by copyright. That’s not the intent. Even if it’s a machine.

 

Yeah that's a weird one...  Likely settled before it goes to court.

[Victoria Watcher]

Yes.  I can see both sides though.

 

No human could ever read then compile and re-use the data like machines can.

 

Does access to the NYE digital archives (probably just a regular monthly subscription) include access for your computer?

[dasmo]

Everything they have online is read by computers. It’s call search…. Does google then need to pay royalties to the Times?

[dasmo]

I understand their take. It’s just flawed. I understand all the fear and resentment over it. It’s a very disruptive. But this reminds me of Metallica trying to stop online streaming…. It’s the wrong take.

[Victoria Watcher]

But this reminds me of Metallica trying to stop online streaming…. It’s the wrong take.

 

That's an interesting thought, I think.

 

In the end it all mostly worked out for music streaming.

[dasmo]

Humans can. And do. We are still better, and have the will. The machine is just infinitely faster with way more bandwidth. But it’s not actually creative and has no will. I both hate it and love it. So I completely empathize with the hate. But am not clouded by it. People will be sick of AI written everything very soon… because it is writing everything as we speak. But more restrictions for our safety is not the way forward. If OAI accessed data illegally then go get em. But setting a precedent that learning from a corporation’s materials is protected under copyright? Nope. That’s a wrong take.

[spanky123]

Yes.  I can see both sides though.

 

You could argue that the IP is being used as a component of another product.

[Victoria Watcher]

People will be sick of AI written everything very soon… because it is writing everything as we speak. 

 

I'm already a bit sick of it.  It's just banal filler.  I can spot it now from a mile away.

[Ismo07]

I'm already a bit sick of it.  It's just banal filler.  I can spot it now from a mile away.

 

For now

[dasmo]

You could argue that the IP is being used as a component of another product.

all products do. It’s why patents are specific and time limited. Copyright is less but still somewhat specific. It’s intended to protect the artist, writer, inventor not to prevent new art, writing, and invention.

[dasmo]

So if they used the IP unlawfully then they have a case. But looking at published material freely available and learning from it should not be covered under copyright. What about all those artists sketching and painting from other people’s art in the Louvre? Or other writers reading other writers? The Times should just pull all its material off the internet and spend all its time and money fighting AI. That would be a net positive for the world!

Edited by dasmo, 27 December 2023 - 10:28 AM.

[lanforod]

I'm already a bit sick of it. It's just banal filler. I can spot it now from a mile away.

There has been banal filler all over the Internet for a long time now. This is just a different flavour of the same crap.

[Victoria Watcher]

Elon Musk Says Human Patient Is ‘Recovering Well’ After Neuralink Implants Brain Chip

The brain-science company implanted the quarter-size chip into its first patient Sunday

https://people.com/e...implant-8552162

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 29 January 2024 - 11:30 PM.

[Mike K.]

I'm already a bit sick of it. It's just banal filler. I can spot it now from a mile away.

Especially on YouTube. Soon algorithms in search will identify this auto generated garbage and just discount it.

[dasmo]

AI battling AI.

[dasmo]

George Carlin’s estate is suing Will Sasso’s podcast for this George Carlin AI special.
https://www.reuters....ine-2024-01-26/

Edited by dasmo, 30 January 2024 - 08:21 AM.

[Matt R.]

“Representatives for the podcast could not immediately be reached for comment.”

The author of the article should have just used ChatGPT to make a comment in the style of will Sasso.

I love Sasso’s Steven Seagal homage from Mad TV.

[dasmo]

“Representatives for the podcast could not immediately be reached for comment.”

The author of the article should have just used ChatGPT to make a comment in the style of will Sasso.

I love Sasso’s Steven Seagal homage from Mad TV.

He had a funny Vine channel for a while too. 

[Mike K.]

AI battling AI.

 

Like dumb vs dumber.

 

Neither are AI, it turns out.