this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2024
105 points (99.1% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

67906 readers
1272 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

FUCK ADOBE!

Torrenting/P2P:

Gaming:


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hernanca@beehaw.org 46 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Why not go full data nihilist and say that every file is just a natural number expressed in binary.

[–] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago

Yeah but I legally own this particular number >:E

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 3 points 2 years ago

I'm good with that

[–] Steve@communick.news 39 points 2 years ago (2 children)

What about copyrighted code?
Like for instance, GPU drivers?

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 22 points 2 years ago

Yes, that would also be statistical correlations to an AI model. The specific kind of information they're being trained on doesn't affect the underlying mechanism of model training.

[–] prex@aussie.zone 8 points 2 years ago

I mentioned it before:

If they use any GPL code for their model then any output would be a derived work and a violation of the GPL.

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 35 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Aren’t MP3s just a statistical correlation?

Besides, you really don’t need to zoom in on “but muh license agreement” to roast these AI turds.

They’re very clear: We’re gonna put creatives out of work, we’re gonna sell a unified product to replace them, and we’re gonna use their own labor to build their replacements.

That’s anticompetitive.

Nail em on that instead of trying to thread the needle on reining in the tech lords without damaging e.g. linguistic analysis researchers.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 4 points 2 years ago

We’re gonna put creatives out of work, we’re gonna sell a unified product to replace them, and we’re gonna use their own labor to build their replacements.

Yes, but: it's short sighted, and wrong. Until we have a sea change in the LLM/AGI space, "creatives" will be needed for seed data. LLMs that are recursively trained on their own output degrade and produce worse output over time.

The "yes" part is that companies looking to replace paying people for their work, but still hoping that Creative Commons types are still posting online for free harvesting.

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website -1 points 2 years ago

The tools exist for creatives to use.

[–] gbin@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Copies are just very strong statistical correlations.

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah I'm just downloading random data for fun in little tiny bits. If that data happens to arrange itself in the form of the latest episode of Doctor Who then that's not my problem.

[–] B0rax@feddit.org 2 points 2 years ago

Reminder for everyone who does not know: doctor who is available on the bbc iplayer, which can be downloaded with get-iplayer.

If you are outside the UK, all you need is a DNS or VPN.

[–] CAPSpirou@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 2 years ago

These files are just correlated bits and bytes, nothing more.

[–] Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Damn, this article is so biased.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Seemed pretty fair and fact-based to me. What bias are you seeing?

[–] Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago

I think it's really disingenuous to mention the DeviantArt/Midjourney/Runway AI/Stability AI lawsuit without talking about how most of the infringement claims were dismissed by the judge.