3 ms·
Apart from the open questions of the quality of such once-removed-from-human-generated training data... I can't speak to the legality of the situation, but the
by shadowgovt 4y ago
Apart from the open questions of the quality of such once-removed-from-human-generated training data...
I can't speak to the legality of the situation, but the morality of using, without their consent, data generated by someone's AI engine...
... that was, itself, trained on other people's data without their consent...
... should be, at the very least, equivalently evil to the original AI's training.
- jstanley 4y agoSo... not at all evil?
- MrYellowP 4y agoNo, it shouldn't. Maybe you should be, at the very least, considered a questionable person. I do not in any way or form consider anything to be wrong with what they're doing, but I question the senses of someone thinking this is immoral or even evil. Keep your subjective nonsense out of this.
- shadowgovt 4y agoSo were it to be the case that we should consider building an AI by scraping people's publicly-available work without their consent to be immoral (as many whose art was scraped to build e.g. stable diffusion would argue it should be)... Do you not agree (in that context) we should consider scraping the output of an AI generated via such an immoral process to create yet another AI also immoral? At the very least, I'd think we would consider it further laundering of other people's labor with just extra steps.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jamiek88 4y agoEvery opinion is subjective.