4 ms·

Will we see human washing, where Ai art or works get a "Made by man" final touch in some third world mechanical turk den? Would that add another financial detra

• Retric 2y ago
  The law generally takes a dim view of such attempts to get around things like that. AI biggest defense is claiming they are so beneficial to society that what they are doing is fine.
  • gmueckl 2y ago
    That argument stands on the mother of all slippery slopes! Just find a way to make your product mpressive or ubiquitous and all of a sudden it doesn't matter how much you break the law along the way? That's so insane I don't even know where to start.
    • ashoeafoot 2y ago
      Worked for purdue
    • Retric 2y ago
      YouTube, AirBnB, Uber, and many many others have all done stuff that’s blatant against the law but gotten away with it due to utility.
    • rcxdude 2y ago
      Why not, considering copyright law specifically has fair use outlined for that kind of thing? It's not some overriding consequence of law, it's that copyright is a granting of a privilege to individuals and that that privilege is not absolute.
  • gaganyaan 2y ago
    That is not in any way the biggest defense
    • Retric 2y ago
      It’s worked for many startups and court cases in the past. Copyright even has many explicit examples of the utility loophole look at say: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios%2C_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Unive....
• righthand 2y ago
  That will probably happen to some extent if not already. However I think people will just stop publishing online if malicious corps like OpenAI are just going to harvest works for their own gain. People publish for personal gain, not to enrich the public or enrich private entities.
  • Filligree 2y ago
    However, I get my personal gain regardless of whether or not the text is also ingested into ChatGPT. In fact, since I use ChatGPT a lot, I get more gain if it is.
    • righthand 2y ago
      How much of your income have you spent on ChatGPT vs how much ChatGPT has increased your income?
      • Filligree 2y ago
        ChatGPT doesn’t increase my income. It’s useful for my hobbies, and probably made those more expensive.
• CuriouslyC 2y ago
  There's no point in having third world mechanical turk dens do finishing passes on AI output unless you're trying to make it worse. Artists are already using AI to photobash images, and writers are using AI to outline and create rough drafts. The point of having a human in the loop is to tell the AI what is worth creating, then recognize where the AI output can be improved. If we have algorithms telling the AI what to make and content mill hacks smearing shit on the output to make it look more human, that would be the worst of both worlds.
  • TheDong 2y ago
    I think the point of the comment isn't to have this finishing layer to make things "better", but to make things "legal". Humans are allowed to synthesize a bunch of inputs together and produce a new novel copyrighted. An algorithm, if it mixes a bunch of copyrighted things together by itself, plausibly is incapable of producing a novel copyright, and instead inherits the old copyright. Just like Clean Room Design (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean-room_design https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean-room_design) can be used to re-create the same software free of the original copyright, I think the parent is arguing that a mechanical turk process could allow AI to produce the same output free of the original copyright.
• doctorpangloss 2y ago
  Did you miss the twist at the end of the article? > Andrew Deck is a generative AI staff writer at Nieman Lab...