6 ms·

I liked the original title better "The Left Doesn't Hate Technology, We Hate Being Exploited". I think that sums up my grievances towards AI - amazing technolog

I liked the original title better "The Left Doesn't Hate Technology, We Hate Being Exploited". I think that sums up my grievances towards AI - amazing technology and certainly a booster to anyone's life, but what is the cost? Why AI companies get to download, consume and transform all copyrighted works essentially for free (I think there were some lawsuits that resulted in the companies paying), but normal people have to pay millions if they wanted to access all that data and pay to the original creators? I'm also not so ok with the workforce being displaced, but it's what happens with technological progress. But am not ok that it's displacing the writers while benefiting from their prior work without paying them a cent.

simianwords 8mo ago
[flagged]
- TSiege 8mo ago
  This is a false equivalency if I just share torrented data I can go to prison. These companies downloaded and seeded copy righted material and then sold a product made from that data. If I a civilian did this I would face time in prison. If you think this is fine great, but what people are made about is the hypocrisy of the current moment. As the title said "Techno-cynics are wounded techno-optimists"
  - simianwords 8mo ago
    > These companies downloaded and seeded copy righted material and then sold a product made from that data but no company did this.
    - totallygeeky 8mo ago
      [flagged]
      - simianwords 8mo ago
        can you share a source for this please? i'll gladly fix my comment.
    - FrustratedMonky 8mo ago
      OpenAI did, and this is so uncontroversial, I'm surprised you are saying it didn't happen.
      - simianwords 8mo ago
        can you share a source? if it is credible, i'll gladly update and say i was wrong.
        FrustratedMonky 8mo ago
        [dead]
    - TSiege 8mo ago
      OpenAI, Meta, and Anthropic all are known to have done this. It's even been exposed in company internal communications. Anthropic already settled their court case. You're an 11 month old account and I suspect you are some sort of bot or user meant to spread misinformation on the forum.
      - simianwords 8mo ago
        its a big allegation, can you share any source for OpenAI and Anthropic seeding torrents?
        autoexec 8mo ago
        I can say for certain that Meta did it. They admitted to it. (https://www.wired.com/story/new-documents-unredacted-meta-copyright-ai-lawsuit/ https://www.wired.com/story/new-documents-unredacted-meta-co...) Do you think that OpenAI or Anthropic should get a pass for using torrents if they used special BitTorrent clients that only leached? Do you think the RIAA would be cool with me if I did the same?
        simianwords 8mo ago
        incorrect. > There is no dispute that Meta torrented LibGen and Anna's Archive, but the parties dispute whether and to what extent Meta uploaded (via leeching or seeding) the data it torrented. A Meta engineer involved in the torrenting wrote a script to prevent seeding, but apparently not leeching. See Pls. MSJ at 13; id. Ex. 71 ¶¶ 16–17, 19; id. Ex. 67 at 3, 6–7, 13–16, 24–26; see also Meta MSJ Ex. 38 at 4–5. Therefore, say the plaintiffs, because BitTorrent's default settings allow for leeching, and because Meta did nothing to change those default settings, Meta must have reuploaded “at least some” of the data Meta downloaded via torrent. The plaintiffs assert further that Meta chose not to take any steps to prevent leeching because that would have slowed its download speeds. Meta responds that, even if it reuploaded some of what it downloaded, that doesn't mean it reuploaded any of the plaintiffs’ books. It also notes that leeching was not clearly an issue in the case until recently, and so it has not yet had a chance to fully develop evidence to address the plaintiffs’ assertions. They did leeching but not seeding. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-n-d-cal/117422847.html https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-n-d-cal/1174228... > If I a civilian did this I would face time in prison no if you had leeched its is very unlikely that you would face time in prison.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 8mo ago
      I'm not a lawyer and I don't follow this area super closely, but it sure sounds like they did? https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/meta-staff-torrented-nearly-82tb-of-pirated-books-for-ai-training-court-records-reveal-copyright-violations https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell... > Facebook parent-company Meta is currently fighting a class action lawsuit alleging copyright infringement and unfair competition, among others, with regards to how it trained LLaMA. According to an X (formerly Twitter) post by vx-underground, court records reveal that the social media company used pirated torrents to download 81.7TB of data from shadow libraries including Anna’s Archive, Z-Library, and LibGen. It then used this information to train its AI models. > Aside from those messages, documents also revealed that the company took steps so that its infrastructure wasn’t used in these downloading and seeding operations so that the activity wouldn’t be traced back to Meta. The court documents say that this constitutes evidence of Meta’s unlawful activity, which seems like it’s taking deliberate steps to circumvent copyright laws.
      - simianwords 8mo ago
        where did they seed?
        yjftsjthsd-h 8mo ago
        My second quote includes, > so that its infrastructure wasn’t used in these downloading and seeding operations so that the activity wouldn’t be traced back to Meta. (emphasis added) If you'd like it from another source using different words, https://masslawblog.com/copyright/copyright-ai-and-metas-torrent-problem/ https://masslawblog.com/copyright/copyright-ai-and-metas-tor... has > According to the plaintiffs’ forensic analysis, Meta’s servers re-seeded the files back into the swarm, effectively redistributing mountains of pirated works. and specifically talks about that being a problem. I will grant that until/unless the cases are decided, this is allegedly, so we'll see.
- FrustratedMonky 8mo ago
  "you can go to anna's archive right now and do what they did" This is such a troll statement. Anybody could be OpenAI, all you need is anna archive and couple of PC's. all you losers could have been billionaires if you'd just do it.
- _gabiru 8mo ago
  wow, ragebait, who could've thought
- guitarlimeo 8mo ago
  No thank you, I like to hold on to my values which are to pay artists and creators fairly.
autoexec 8mo ago
I care a lot more about the environmental harm, the impact on computer hardware prices, and what AI is doing to the energy prices which somehow become everyone else's burden to pay than I am about the rampant copyright infringement. The hypocrisy in how copyright is enforced for AI companies vs everybody else is pretty infuriating though. We have courts ruling against people for downloading youtube videos to enable them to use clips for fair use purposes (https://torrentfreak.com/ripping-clips-for-youtube-reaction-videos-can-violate-the-dmca-court-rules/ https://torrentfreak.com/ripping-clips-for-youtube-reaction-...) while Nvidia is free to violate the DMCA in the exact same way to take youtuber's content in full (https://www.tomsguide.com/ai/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-80-years-worth-of-of-videos-daily-to-train-ai-models-what-you-need-to-know https://www.tomsguide.com/ai/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-80-y...).
belZaah 8mo ago
Not just that. An LLM is an universal middleman for anything creative. Books, code, music. Everything written, spoken or performed can be accessed as digested and mixed by the LLM. It breaks all content-relates business models by inserting a middleman, that seeks to capture as much value as possible while actively arguing the source of mediated content is not entitled to anything. This is not sustainable, as the content source will loose motivation, including non-monetary motivation. This in turn will stop the middleman being able to capture value created by them. But the ability to combine existing content without anything new being added is likely to be too little to offset the enormous costs involved. Whatever the outcome for the AI-bros, human content generation will decrease massively for a long while. Which has a massive detrimental effect on culture globally.

simianwords 8mo ago

[flagged]

TSiege 8mo ago
This is a false equivalency if I just share torrented data I can go to prison. These companies downloaded and seeded copy righted material and then sold a product made from that data. If I a civilian did this I would face time in prison. If you think this is fine great, but what people are made about is the hypocrisy of the current moment. As the title said "Techno-cynics are wounded techno-optimists"
- simianwords 8mo ago
  > These companies downloaded and seeded copy righted material and then sold a product made from that data but no company did this.
  - totallygeeky 8mo ago
    [flagged]
    - simianwords 8mo ago
      can you share a source for this please? i'll gladly fix my comment.
  - FrustratedMonky 8mo ago
    OpenAI did, and this is so uncontroversial, I'm surprised you are saying it didn't happen.
    - simianwords 8mo ago
      can you share a source? if it is credible, i'll gladly update and say i was wrong.
      - FrustratedMonky 8mo ago
        [dead]
  - TSiege 8mo ago
    OpenAI, Meta, and Anthropic all are known to have done this. It's even been exposed in company internal communications. Anthropic already settled their court case. You're an 11 month old account and I suspect you are some sort of bot or user meant to spread misinformation on the forum.
    - simianwords 8mo ago
      its a big allegation, can you share any source for OpenAI and Anthropic seeding torrents?
      - autoexec 8mo ago
        I can say for certain that Meta did it. They admitted to it. (https://www.wired.com/story/new-documents-unredacted-meta-copyright-ai-lawsuit/ https://www.wired.com/story/new-documents-unredacted-meta-co...) Do you think that OpenAI or Anthropic should get a pass for using torrents if they used special BitTorrent clients that only leached? Do you think the RIAA would be cool with me if I did the same?
        simianwords 8mo ago
        incorrect. > There is no dispute that Meta torrented LibGen and Anna's Archive, but the parties dispute whether and to what extent Meta uploaded (via leeching or seeding) the data it torrented. A Meta engineer involved in the torrenting wrote a script to prevent seeding, but apparently not leeching. See Pls. MSJ at 13; id. Ex. 71 ¶¶ 16–17, 19; id. Ex. 67 at 3, 6–7, 13–16, 24–26; see also Meta MSJ Ex. 38 at 4–5. Therefore, say the plaintiffs, because BitTorrent's default settings allow for leeching, and because Meta did nothing to change those default settings, Meta must have reuploaded “at least some” of the data Meta downloaded via torrent. The plaintiffs assert further that Meta chose not to take any steps to prevent leeching because that would have slowed its download speeds. Meta responds that, even if it reuploaded some of what it downloaded, that doesn't mean it reuploaded any of the plaintiffs’ books. It also notes that leeching was not clearly an issue in the case until recently, and so it has not yet had a chance to fully develop evidence to address the plaintiffs’ assertions. They did leeching but not seeding. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-n-d-cal/117422847.html https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-n-d-cal/1174228... > If I a civilian did this I would face time in prison no if you had leeched its is very unlikely that you would face time in prison.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 8mo ago
    I'm not a lawyer and I don't follow this area super closely, but it sure sounds like they did? https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/meta-staff-torrented-nearly-82tb-of-pirated-books-for-ai-training-court-records-reveal-copyright-violations https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell... > Facebook parent-company Meta is currently fighting a class action lawsuit alleging copyright infringement and unfair competition, among others, with regards to how it trained LLaMA. According to an X (formerly Twitter) post by vx-underground, court records reveal that the social media company used pirated torrents to download 81.7TB of data from shadow libraries including Anna’s Archive, Z-Library, and LibGen. It then used this information to train its AI models. > Aside from those messages, documents also revealed that the company took steps so that its infrastructure wasn’t used in these downloading and seeding operations so that the activity wouldn’t be traced back to Meta. The court documents say that this constitutes evidence of Meta’s unlawful activity, which seems like it’s taking deliberate steps to circumvent copyright laws.
    - simianwords 8mo ago
      where did they seed?
      - yjftsjthsd-h 8mo ago
        My second quote includes, > so that its infrastructure wasn’t used in these downloading and seeding operations so that the activity wouldn’t be traced back to Meta. (emphasis added) If you'd like it from another source using different words, https://masslawblog.com/copyright/copyright-ai-and-metas-torrent-problem/ https://masslawblog.com/copyright/copyright-ai-and-metas-tor... has > According to the plaintiffs’ forensic analysis, Meta’s servers re-seeded the files back into the swarm, effectively redistributing mountains of pirated works. and specifically talks about that being a problem. I will grant that until/unless the cases are decided, this is allegedly, so we'll see.
FrustratedMonky 8mo ago
"you can go to anna's archive right now and do what they did" This is such a troll statement. Anybody could be OpenAI, all you need is anna archive and couple of PC's. all you losers could have been billionaires if you'd just do it.
_gabiru 8mo ago
wow, ragebait, who could've thought
guitarlimeo 8mo ago
No thank you, I like to hold on to my values which are to pay artists and creators fairly.

autoexec 8mo ago

I care a lot more about the environmental harm, the impact on computer hardware prices, and what AI is doing to the energy prices which somehow become everyone else's burden to pay than I am about the rampant copyright infringement. The hypocrisy in how copyright is enforced for AI companies vs everybody else is pretty infuriating though. We have courts ruling against people for downloading youtube videos to enable them to use clips for fair use purposes (https://torrentfreak.com/ripping-clips-for-youtube-reaction-videos-can-violate-the-dmca-court-rules/ https://torrentfreak.com/ripping-clips-for-youtube-reaction-...) while Nvidia is free to violate the DMCA in the exact same way to take youtuber's content in full (https://www.tomsguide.com/ai/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-80-years-worth-of-of-videos-daily-to-train-ai-models-what-you-need-to-know https://www.tomsguide.com/ai/nvidia-accused-of-scraping-80-y...).

belZaah 8mo ago

Not just that. An LLM is an universal middleman for anything creative. Books, code, music. Everything written, spoken or performed can be accessed as digested and mixed by the LLM. It breaks all content-relates business models by inserting a middleman, that seeks to capture as much value as possible while actively arguing the source of mediated content is not entitled to anything. This is not sustainable, as the content source will loose motivation, including non-monetary motivation. This in turn will stop the middleman being able to capture value created by them. But the ability to combine existing content without anything new being added is likely to be too little to offset the enormous costs involved. Whatever the outcome for the AI-bros, human content generation will decrease massively for a long while. Which has a massive detrimental effect on culture globally.