this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2024
270 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

59605 readers
4225 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works 60 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I am tired of my information making companies lots of money instead of me.(privacy issues aside) Shame you can't copyright yourself at birth.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 19 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Everything you make is already copyrighted by default. Copyright is limited in what it lets you do, however. AI training likely isn't restricted by it.

[–] ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maybe patent yourself would work better...hmmm

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

That sounds messy. Do we need any primer, or patent thinner? How many brushes do we need?

[–] fatalError@lemmy.sdf.org -2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Well, nothing is free. If you aren't paying with money, you are paying with data or time, which may or may not be more valuable to you than money.

[–] ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Even paying for apps and services does not stop the collecting and selling of your data.

[–] fatalError@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I know, but not paying to begin with created the incentive to have such an infrastructure to spy on people, even if these people decide to pay. And I am not saying it's users' fault.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Well, nothing is free.

False. Friendship, family, sunshine, peace, etc. Free for now at least.

[–] fatalError@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You've listed some kinda vague concepts, family and friendship may be free, but their help and attention costs money and time. As for sunshine, that costs energy, atoms are fused into other atoms to produce the light, so while we aren't paying it, it is getting "spent". Peace is furthest away from free, just look at how much the wars to restore peace cost

[–] kevindqc@lemmy.world 30 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And they will probably use the energy equivalent to a small nation to do the training. LLMs are great.

[–] doodledup@lemmy.world -4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

Their data centers are 100% powered by renewable energy. Google is 100% carbon free. It's not as bad as you think it is.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Google promised to be carbon free by 2030.... Just as other have done and never even moved an inch towards that goal

The point is exactly to get gullible people like you to think it's all good until 2030 when some responsible people will battle to out that Google did nothing in reality to get there... Then they'll promise it again for 2050

[–] doodledup@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Sorry I was a little wrong. Apparently 100% of Googles annual electricity consumption is matched with renewable energy that is supplied back to the grid. So basically, at night when there is no sun they use power from the grid and during the day they compensate it with excess renewable energy production.

It's not 100% carbon neutral. But it doesn't sound that bad either. There is worse things than that.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sorry I was a little wrong. Apparently 100% of Googles annual electricity consumption is matched with renewable energy that is supplied back to the grid

Not even... what they do is "pay" someone for renewable energy (not the energy they consume, nor do they produce energy on solar panels or anything renewable to go back into the grid)

This is their own statement: "In 2022 – for the sixth consecutive year – Google matched 100 percent of its global annual electricity consumption with purchases of renewable energy" (source)[https://www.google.com/about/datacenters/cleanenergy/]

And even that is not true since their actual report says that in 2021 they barely made it to 66%

Globally, 66% of the electricity use at Google data centers was matched with carbon- free energy on an hourly basis, 5% higher in 2019 but 1% lower in 2020. We expected this fluctuation: in 2020, we brought a large number of CFE projects online, leading to a large jump in our 2020 CFE % and thus a high baseline for calculating changes between 2020 and 2021 (source)[https://www.gstatic.com/gumdrop/sustainability/2021-carbon-free-energy-data-centers.pdf]

So, in a nutshell... they are throwing some money at it and pretending they are not polluting anymore.

It’s not 100% carbon neutral.

Google declared itself carbon neutral (whatever they think that means) back in 2007

There is worse things than that.

this is literally the lowest bar to clear

[–] doodledup@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Purchasing and producing renewable energy is the same thing. If you purchase it, somebody else is producing it for you.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 5 points 5 months ago

But they are not even using said energy themselves.... that is like throwing my garbage right on the street but paying someone in India to pick some garbage over there (for at lot less)... if you are my neighbour, would you think it's fine?

I don't need google "producing" clean energy... I want them CONSUMING clean energy... as it is, they are pollution just as much as ever (more every year) but they pretend to be clean by throwing money at it... at the end of the day, the planet keeps getting polluted and the climate nicely on its way to cooking us alive

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago

90% of the time they are "carbon free" through carbon offsets, which are generally a huge amount of bs.

[–] ben_dover@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

the post is talking about Meta though

[–] SaltySalamander@fedia.io 2 points 5 months ago

Their data centers are 100% powered by renewable energy

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

You’re the product.

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 5 months ago

"Feels a bit like an invasion of privacy" as opposed to what that you already do on these platforms???

[–] whereisk@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

I hate that the headline is putting it as a foregone conclusion.

Instead of something along the lines of: Will the government allow this massive theft of intellectual property of average Australians?

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Ah shit, that's the year I joined.

[–] Magister@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

Australia? Most used word : cunt

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That surely won't result in an alarming use rate of words like n****r and f****t. Hell, that's the window of the hit YouTube video entitled "N****rF****t" starring... A member of the defuct comedy group (Derrick Comedy) that made the film, Donald Glover.

Bizarre how fast the changes we've seen have happened. The video was purposefully 'edgy,' but still.

[–] boatsnhos931@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Classic lolz

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 5 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


If you're among the majority of Australians with Facebook or Instagram accounts, your social activity on those platforms is about to start training Meta's artificial intelligence (AI) tools – and if you live in Australia, you can't say no.

When that policy comes into effect, Meta will start taking user data from as far back as 2007 and use it to train and improve their AI tools.

Dr Joanne Gray, a lecturer in digital cultures at the University of Sydney, explains: "The precedent in the US suggests that these companies are doing it under fair use, a US exemption that allows you to do some copying and create something new.

Speaking of legal cases, advocacy group NOYB (none of your business) has launched 11 complaints against Meta in the EU in relation to this new policy.

They've now added a "Made by AI" label, requiring users to have all realistic appearing AI-generated content carry it.

Cara incorporates a project called Glaze, "a system designed to protect human artists by disrupting style mimicry in the training of generative AI models".


The original article contains 879 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago

Glad I got rid of these two a week or so ago. Man fb is a brain-eating amoeba

[–] timmymac@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

Creepy as F.