A rising movement of artists and authors are suing tech companies for training AI on their work without credit or payment

  • Fonchote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree with you, the only caveat here is that the artist mentioned say that their books were illegally obtained. Which is a valid argument. I don’t see c how training an ai in publicly available information is any different than a human reading/seeing said information and learning from it. Now that same human pirating a book is illegal.

    The additional complexity here are laws that were written and are enforced by people that don’t fully grasp this technology. If this was traditional code, then yes it could be a copywrite issue, but the models should be trained on enough data to create derivative works.

    • 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t see c how training an ai in publicly available information is any different than a human reading/seeing said information and learning from it.

      well, the difference is that humans are quite well autoregulated system… as new artists are created by learning from the old ones, the old ones die, so the total number stays about the same. the new artists also have to eat, so they won’t undermine others in the industry (at least not behind some line) and they cannot scale their services to the point where one artist would serve all the customers and all other artists would go die due to starvation. that’s how the human civilization works since the dawn of the civilization.

      i hope i don’t need to describe how ai is different.