237
Maven Imported 1.12 Million Fediverse Posts (wedistribute.org)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Maven, a new social network backed by OpenAI's Sam Altman, found itself in a controversy today when it imported a huge amount of posts and profiles from the Fediverse, and then ran AI analysis to alter the content.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 32 points 2 years ago (20 children)

People can complain, but the Fediverse is built to make consuming user’s data easy. If you don’t want AI using your data, don’t put it on such an easily “scrapable” network.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Yeah, and girls dress for rape. They are just aaasking for it!

    I will go off on a tangent.

    Just because something is online it does not mean I give a full green light on anything.

    Fuck this noise of social parasitic networks hammering free service therefore pay with data into everyone's skull. And everyone posts crap.

    It is a billion dollar business. LLMs are extracting millions and will generate more.

    You know why? Because worthless shit you post online is not worthless after all.

    Yes, you are reading it right. Pay me. Pay us.

    Before anyone ridicules this. Yall be defending billion dollar corporations, staffed with millionaires below C-levels.

    People should start demanding money from these greedy assholes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago*

    I don't think they're making a moral argument, but pointing out the reality of the situation as it stands.

    This is a problem that can only be fixed through legislation and aggressive enforcement backed by large punitive actions.

    Until that happens, it's better to acknowledge and understand the reality of the situation, than to believe that a morally righteous condemnation will somehow unmake that reality.

    It sucks. I agree with your philosophical stance, except for the payment for personal data, as I'd prefer a complete opt-out. However, none of that changes where we're at right now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    ITT people not recognizing that there’s a difference between comparing and equating.

    People, it’s possible to make analogies to more serious situations without saying the two things are equal. The statement above is saying it’s there’s a shared mentality, not a shared level of consequence/seriousness.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    A mild copyright violation based on a system designed around the constant distribution of copies of things is NOT a parable about sexual violence, people.

    I feel like this extremely insensitive rape take is the fediverse's version of the Godwin Law.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago

    You're right but...

    It's the same with open source products. Companies just take it, make billions off it, give nothing back, will try the embrace, enhance , extinguish tactics, will hide any GPL licensing because of course they would...

    It'll happen anyway, and you can't stop it. Like you said, girls dress to rape is bullshit. But if a girl goes in a skimpy bikini in a Bombay bus at 9pm, then you're kind of asking for something. Open source is open for everyone, that is kind of the point, it's the reason why it became so big in the first place, but it WILL be abused because there are always abusers out there

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago

    Alternatively, use a closed ecosystem susceptible to data rot and loss.

    Want to contribute to our open source project? Join our discord

    Would you want art to be unfindable because scraping for AI image generation happens? It's a solution looking for problems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    This is what I've been saying the entire time. It sucks, and it's wrong, but the fediverse is built from the ground up as an open sharing platform, where amour data is shared with anyone. It shouldn't be, and it's wrong, but there is nothing to stop anyone from doing it. To change that would alter federation at a core level

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

    That doesn’t mean it’s licensed to be used in a for profit software.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    If it ends up being ruled that training an LLM is fair use so long as the LLM doesn’t reproduce the works it is trained on verbatim, then licensing becomes irrelevant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I've had this argument with other people, but essentially at this point there is no licensing beyond server ownership here, and most servers don't have any licenses defined. Even if they do, then sure they did something wrong... but how would you ever prove it or enforce it? The only way to actually disallow them is to switch from open federation to closed - which goes against what we're trying to build with federation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago*

    There has been instances before where LLMs gave up clues as to what source it used. When that happens, they can be sued.

    Im okay with people using our data for whatever, since it’s all open and it should be. But I rather put a little bit of effort to make for profit use technically illegal. It’s better than nothing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    People can complain, but the Fediverse is built to make consuming user’s data easy

    Correction: it is built to make consuming users's data not easy, but more human.

    WHat you are thinking of is AP, not "Fediverse", and even then that's a stretch.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Correction: it is built to make consuming users's data not easy, but more human.

    What does that even mean?

    WHat you are thinking of is AP, not "Fediverse", and even then that's a stretch.

    Honestly, I think Fediverse is inseparable from AP (or some similar protocol). You can split hairs if you want, but the thing that makes it different from all other social media services is that it allows the content created by users on one service to be imported into a different service.

    You can hope and dream that it is only services like Lemmy consuming user content from services like Mastadon, but this same protocol makes it easy for services like ChatGPT to consume the same data.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Just because our data is accessible doesn’t mean it’s legally licensed to be used by a for profit company. Free doesn’t meant you can do what you want with it, it just means no cost.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don’t disagree. I’m just saying that so long as you’re putting content on this platform, you are powerless to stop any service from using the features of the platform in whatever way they want.

    It was built for easy and open consumption of user content by other services.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •