3 ms·
Your stance, if it becomes law, guarantees that only the giant corporations you hate will be able to negotiate licenses to train their AI. It guarantees that li
by nhchris 4y ago
Your stance, if it becomes law, guarantees that only the giant corporations you hate will be able to negotiate licenses to train their AI. It guarantees that libre AI tools will be left far behind.
Is that what you want?
- snickerbockers 4y agoi think it's arrogant and selfish to assume that everybody has a stake in AI research. i want the license that the software i create (which has nothing to do with AI) to be obeyed. anyways, there's a lot of ways that AI researchers could engage with IP owners to come up with a fair way to use their work, but nobody's making that effort. If my content is part of an AI's training set (and especially if that AI has a tendency to output excerpts of its own training set verbatim, as github's copilot has been shown to do) then it's not unreasonable to set terms and conditions, which could restrict how the content is used for training and what sort of compensation (if any) I deserve. I'm of the opinion that it's time for new versions of GPL and CC licenses to be created which will enumerate how content can be used for AI training.
- nhchris 4y ago> it's arrogant and selfish to assume that everybody has a stake in AI research I didn't assume anything, just described the likely consequence of your preferences.