I’m not entirely sure I understand the republican strategy around Taylor Swift.
Like, doesn’t harassing her for basically no reason only increase the likelihood that she does get involved in political battles, not reduce?
This just seems like another hair-brained, half thought through plan.
Computers don’t make mistake, software makes mistakes.
It isn’t fair use, See most of faq @ fairuse faq.
“Fair Use” is often the subject of discussion when talking about online copyright with regards to online video content or music sampling, but it’s notably a flawed defense as it generally has no legal definition for how much of certain content can be used or referenced. The very first line of that faq has the following note:
How do I get permission to use somebody else’s work?
You can ask for it. If you know who the copyright owner is, you may contact the owner directly. If you are not certain about the ownership or have other related questions, you may wish to request that the Copyright Office conduct a search of its records or you may search yourself. See the next question for more details.
All artists / writers and others are asking LLM model producers to do is a) Ask for permission or B) Attribute the artists work in some kind of ledger, respecting the copyright of their work. Every work you make (write/play/draw/whatever) has a copyright that should be respected by companies and are not waived by EULA or TOS (ever) and must be respected in order for author attribution as a concept to work at all. There is plenty of free, permissive copyrighted content on the internet that can be used instead to train an LLM, but simply asking for permission or giving attribution would at least be a step in the right direction for these companies and for the industry as a whole.
Defenders of AI will note that the “use” of art in LLM is limited and thus protected by fair use, but that is debatable based on the content of the above listed FAQ.
How much of someone else’s work can I use without getting permission?
Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports. There are no legal rules permitting the use of a specific number of words, a certain number of musical notes, or percentage of a work. Whether a particular use qualifies as fair use depends on all the circumstances. See, Fair Use Index, and Circular 21, Reproductions of Copyrighted Works by Educators and Librarians.
You can see that the use cases above (commentary, criticism, news reporting and scholarly reports) does not qualify LLM companies to use train their models with copyrighted data for privatized industry. Additionally, you’ll note that “market disruptive” uses cannot be protected by fair use in it’s definition, meaning that displacing artists with AI automatically makes LLM use of copyrighted material an infraction of copyright that is not protected by the fair use clause.
Regardless, this will need to be proved in court and even if it passes certain criteria, it will not apply to all infractions. Fair use is a defense, not a protection, and thus LLM producers will have to spend time in court in order to defend individual infractions. There’s no way for them to catch all copyright infringement with one ruling, it needs to be proved on a case-by-case basis.
IANAL but this is my 2 cents on the matter.
I mean, I sort of get why the developers say it’s Discord’s policy even if it’s a bit misleading.
Game developers don’t really want to moderate their own discord server and simply want to use the strictest automated filtering system available and this just happens to include phone number linking. The operators of the servers themselves do not have access to these phone numbers and they are only stored by discord directly to prevent spam.
I would personally prefer games to not have their communities tied to discord, akin to how forums were big deal for games back in the day, but even then they do need some kind of automated way to filter out all the crap. This is a problem with moderating any community, including a lemmy/kbin/mastodon, and I don’t blame them for simply picking the strictest option to ease the burden on the 1 or 2 people who are charged with managing these servers (especially if they are unpaid or volunteers, which is a whole other can of worms that shouldn’t happen…)
Hey! It’s like they read my last comment in the shutdown announcement thread.
This is really the best move they can make at this point.
signing into cloud services and downloading apps is just so much easier to do!
This is actually true, but it doesn’t speak to why self hosting is “impossible” and more to how the lack of education around computers have reached an inflection point.
There’s no reason why self hosting should be some bizarre concept; In another reality, we would all have local servers and firewalls that then push our content into the wider internet and perhaps even intranet based notes. Society as a whole would be better if we chose to structure the internet that way instead of handing the keys to the biggest companies on the stock market.
I’ll give this podcast a listen to though, as it might be interesting. I think the reality is that some more docker frontends might help casual users jump into the realm of self hosting – especially be setting up proxy managers and homepage sites (like homarr) that work intuitively that never requires you to enter ports and IPs (though fearing that is also an education problem, not a problem with the concept itself.)
Crazy to me that they’d shut down instead of going open source and integrating with the fediverse. Doesn’t even seem like a good business move as offering hosting for other companies and professional groups seems like a good market opportunity in a world where businesses even dislike Twitter.
Edit: for example, offer gitlab like service but for social media.
If an intern gives you some song lyrics on demand, do they sue the parents?
Uh— what? That analogy makes no sense. AI is trained off actual lyrics, which is why companies who create these models are at risk (they don’t own the data they’re feeding into the model.)
Also your comment is completely mixing Trademark and Copyright examples. It has nothing to do with brand names and everything to do with intellectual property.
deleted by creator
Companies need to stop ignoring copyright on data they don’t own and never have owned.
Ahh crap.
What’s the best no nonsense alternative?
Do you have a source for this? That’s interesting but I can’t find the origin of this story.
The compression artifacts always led me to believe it was computer generated.