4 ms·
Okay Ned Ludd. You're right that technology is only going to get more powerful. But hasn't this always been true? Who decides when it's over the line? The US go
by dreadlordbone 4y ago
Okay Ned Ludd. You're right that technology is only going to get more powerful. But hasn't this always been true? Who decides when it's over the line? The US government?
They clearly aren't the best arbiters of judgement, so who gets to decide "sever consequences"?
- trention 4y agoYes, as a general rule the government decides when it's ok to forbid you from doing something. If the US government wants, it can make it a crime to train/use these models. Banning the training part is pretty much game over for this industry. I personally hope it happens as soon as possible. Intellectual property theft (without which those models don't exists) shouldn't be allowed.
- TimeBearingDown 4y ago“Intellectual property” is a propaganda phrase that deliberately confuses copyright, trademark, and patent law in order to create the illusion that ideas can or should have owners. (See https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.en.html) I recommend specifically referring to the concept at hand, in this case copyright. Personally I disagree, as the models themselves do not contain any material which can be considered a copyright violation, the value of scraping the open web is easily apparent, the ability to prevent scraping wholesale - even given the legal framework to disallow it - seems dubious, and lastly because the collective potential harm caused by restricting just one or a few of the more arguably more ethical nations from this technology pathway is a known unknown, and possibly a very large one at that.