5 ms·

To me this feels like the argument that we should allow Uber and Airbnb because they're sufficiently "transformative" use cases. When clearly they are playing f

To me this feels like the argument that we should allow Uber and Airbnb because they're sufficiently "transformative" use cases. When clearly they are playing fast and loose by the rules and have taken advantage of being early enough to do so. As soon as the rulemakers caught up, it became obvious that they didn't have a license to operate differently from everyone else, just because they're new and popular. Personally, I agree that a strike against AI fair use would kill these current generation of tools. But I don't see why that would be the end of it. What it would do is to create a market for open source data sets with liberal licenses. We'd lose something by not being able to train models on every piece of media that has ever been on the internet anywhere, but it's not obvious to me that was ever really reasonable in the first place. If the only way to make AI that can produce good writing is to train it on every piece of writing ever produced in the history of the human race... aren't we missing something? Surely if AI has a future, it'll have to overcome this at some point.

musicale 4y ago
> As soon as the rulemakers caught up, it became obvious that they didn't have a license to operate differently from everyone else, just because they're new and popular. This is well said. One of the primary advantages of these businesses was evading the regulation and taxation that their competitors were subject to.
- jokethrowaway 4y ago
  Indeed, but this is the proof the market didn't want the regulation and taxation and wanted better technology. Shouldn't we listen to what people want over bureaucrats?
  - ale42 4y ago
    People want a lot of things, but people can be egoistic. What people want is not necessarily good for the society as a whole. That's why laws exist.
vivegi 4y ago
> What it would do is to create a market for open source data sets with liberal licenses. This is exactly right. Open Datasets is the way to go. I would also say that in the spirit of the Open Access movement for journals and publications, it might be useful to set up an Open Access protocol for training data sets, methods (these are just the algorithms; publishing them openly might be the way to go) and computed models. This will ensure that models are evaluated for risk by a large set of people and any risks/shortcomings could be addressed soon. Quite similar to how cryptographic algorithms are designed / analyzed in public. Obfuscation might look like it helps, but it doesn't in the long run and just creates more headaches.
kayodelycaon 4y ago
There is no "fair use" when it comes to laws and regulations.

musicale 4y ago

> As soon as the rulemakers caught up, it became obvious that they didn't have a license to operate differently from everyone else, just because they're new and popular. This is well said. One of the primary advantages of these businesses was evading the regulation and taxation that their competitors were subject to.

jokethrowaway 4y ago
Indeed, but this is the proof the market didn't want the regulation and taxation and wanted better technology. Shouldn't we listen to what people want over bureaucrats?
- ale42 4y ago
  People want a lot of things, but people can be egoistic. What people want is not necessarily good for the society as a whole. That's why laws exist.

vivegi 4y ago

> What it would do is to create a market for open source data sets with liberal licenses. This is exactly right. Open Datasets is the way to go. I would also say that in the spirit of the Open Access movement for journals and publications, it might be useful to set up an Open Access protocol for training data sets, methods (these are just the algorithms; publishing them openly might be the way to go) and computed models. This will ensure that models are evaluated for risk by a large set of people and any risks/shortcomings could be addressed soon. Quite similar to how cryptographic algorithms are designed / analyzed in public. Obfuscation might look like it helps, but it doesn't in the long run and just creates more headaches.

kayodelycaon 4y ago

There is no "fair use" when it comes to laws and regulations.