4 ms·

> Its going to happen and AI is going to learn lyrics and how to create music, its inevitable. Why is everyone in AI so open to stealing people's work and why

> Its going to happen and AI is going to learn lyrics and how to create music, its inevitable. Why is everyone in AI so open to stealing people's work and why do y'all think "ai" is something with a mind of its own that just runs about and does things? It's a software product and the companies owning it must play by the rules. Period.

lezojeda 4y ago
[dead]
selfhoster11 4y ago
“Companies owning it” is presumably not what the parent had in mind (or at least, not mainly). People should have access to locally-running AI just as megacorps do. And I don’t think it’s reasonable to require licensing for every little thing used to train those, much like we (hopefully) wouldn’t require people leaving the cinema to be memory-wiped to prevent them from stealing creative cues from the film they just watched, if memory wiping was a thing. > why do y'all think "ai" is something with a mind of its own that just runs about and does things? Because GPT-4 is already capable of doing this (very poorly) if incorporated into a larger system that provides it with REPLs, internet access, an initial goal, and some form of memory. GPT-5 will be more capable, and AI will only get better at this.
hammyhavoc 4y ago
Remember NFTs ripping off the work of others? Same crowd.
- gumballindie 4y ago
  Getting the same vibes to be honest. I've seen quite a few switch from crypto currencies to ai. Not sure what they think they will achieve. However the difference between ai and nfts is that ai is powerful and much needed. But there needs to be rules to the game. Also playing by these rules means better ai. It means that instead of spewing content it would actually have to learn, and the result would be a far more accurate and far more reliable output. That's where we should be.
  - hammyhavoc 4y ago
    AI could indeed be brilliant for humanity, but yes, as with crypto, the response to the "Wild West" era of it is too slow before damage is done.
stale2002 4y ago
> Why is everyone in AI so open to stealing people's work Because it is no more "stealing" than when a human learns from other people's work, and then makes a profit off of it. > the companies owning it must play by the rules Nobody has proven that they are breaking any rules.
- gumballindie 4y ago
  These arguments are a bit boring. Machine learning for a chat bot is not a person "learning". It's software. Also I hate to break it to you but humans also pay to learn. It's why books, universities and other learning content costs money one way or another.
  - pixl97 4y ago
    >Machine learning for a chat bot is not a person "learning". It's software. I'd like you to learn more about LLMs then, because under the definition you want to make, you are 'software'. Also, we made libraries so people could learn for free without being beholden to their capitalist masters.
    - gumballindie 4y ago
      > we made libraries so people could learn for free without being beholden to their capitalist masters. Naturally. If you copy the "free" content from those libraries and resell it you are committing plagiarism. Just because something can mimick humans it doesn't meant they are humans. ML is just that, software. There's too much pareidolia out there in AI. Sad, because it's a great concept gradually getting bastardised.
      - pixl97 4y ago
        And if I learn something from that content and make a work of my own? I swear that people on this thread want to create the world envisioned in 'the right to read'.
  - stale2002 4y ago
mattmcknight 4y ago
Is listening to a bunch of music and being inspired by it to create new music stealing?
- gumballindie 4y ago
  If my grandmother had wheels she would have been a bicycle. That's how people comparing ai to humans sound.

lezojeda 4y ago

[dead]

selfhoster11 4y ago

“Companies owning it” is presumably not what the parent had in mind (or at least, not mainly). People should have access to locally-running AI just as megacorps do. And I don’t think it’s reasonable to require licensing for every little thing used to train those, much like we (hopefully) wouldn’t require people leaving the cinema to be memory-wiped to prevent them from stealing creative cues from the film they just watched, if memory wiping was a thing. > why do y'all think "ai" is something with a mind of its own that just runs about and does things? Because GPT-4 is already capable of doing this (very poorly) if incorporated into a larger system that provides it with REPLs, internet access, an initial goal, and some form of memory. GPT-5 will be more capable, and AI will only get better at this.

hammyhavoc 4y ago

Remember NFTs ripping off the work of others? Same crowd.

gumballindie 4y ago
Getting the same vibes to be honest. I've seen quite a few switch from crypto currencies to ai. Not sure what they think they will achieve. However the difference between ai and nfts is that ai is powerful and much needed. But there needs to be rules to the game. Also playing by these rules means better ai. It means that instead of spewing content it would actually have to learn, and the result would be a far more accurate and far more reliable output. That's where we should be.
- hammyhavoc 4y ago
  AI could indeed be brilliant for humanity, but yes, as with crypto, the response to the "Wild West" era of it is too slow before damage is done.

stale2002 4y ago

> Why is everyone in AI so open to stealing people's work Because it is no more "stealing" than when a human learns from other people's work, and then makes a profit off of it. > the companies owning it must play by the rules Nobody has proven that they are breaking any rules.

gumballindie 4y ago
These arguments are a bit boring. Machine learning for a chat bot is not a person "learning". It's software. Also I hate to break it to you but humans also pay to learn. It's why books, universities and other learning content costs money one way or another.
- pixl97 4y ago
  >Machine learning for a chat bot is not a person "learning". It's software. I'd like you to learn more about LLMs then, because under the definition you want to make, you are 'software'. Also, we made libraries so people could learn for free without being beholden to their capitalist masters.
  - gumballindie 4y ago
    > we made libraries so people could learn for free without being beholden to their capitalist masters. Naturally. If you copy the "free" content from those libraries and resell it you are committing plagiarism. Just because something can mimick humans it doesn't meant they are humans. ML is just that, software. There's too much pareidolia out there in AI. Sad, because it's a great concept gradually getting bastardised.
    - pixl97 4y ago
      And if I learn something from that content and make a work of my own? I swear that people on this thread want to create the world envisioned in 'the right to read'.
- stale2002 4y ago

mattmcknight 4y ago

Is listening to a bunch of music and being inspired by it to create new music stealing?

gumballindie 4y ago
If my grandmother had wheels she would have been a bicycle. That's how people comparing ai to humans sound.