▲ 1224 ▼ OpenAI declares AI race “over” if training on copyrighted works isn’t fair use (arstechnica.com) submitted 2 years ago by cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world 481 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] BussyGyatt@feddit.org 36 points 2 years ago (2 children) "How are we supposed to win the race if we can't cheat?!" permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Greyfoxsolid@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Depends on if you consider teaching "cheating." Current AI is just learning material, similar to a human but at much faster rates and with a larger brain. Someone IS going to develop this tech. If you pay attention to the space at all, you'd know how rapidly it is developing and how much the competition in the space is heating up internationally. The East tends to have much more of a feeling of responsibility to the state, so if the state uses "their stuff" to train this extraordinarily powerful technology then they are going to be ok with that because it enhances their state in the world. The West seems to have more of an issue with this, and if you force the West to pay billions or trillions of dollars for everything to teach this system, then it simply either won't get done or will get done at a pace that puts the West at a severe disadvantage. In my view, knowledge belongs to everyone. But I also don't want people more closely aligned with my ideals to be hobbled in the area of building these ultimate knowledge databases and tools. It could even be a major national security threat to not let these technologies develop in the way they need to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] BussyGyatt@feddit.org 1 point 2 years ago If the rules are "You gotta pay for the book" and they don't pay for the book, they broke the rules, that's what I consider cheating. I don't necessarily agree with the rule, I disagree with cheating. This is, of course, relative, as truth and morality in general are. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Greyfoxsolid@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Depends on if you consider teaching "cheating." Current AI is just learning material, similar to a human but at much faster rates and with a larger brain. Someone IS going to develop this tech. If you pay attention to the space at all, you'd know how rapidly it is developing and how much the competition in the space is heating up internationally. The East tends to have much more of a feeling of responsibility to the state, so if the state uses "their stuff" to train this extraordinarily powerful technology then they are going to be ok with that because it enhances their state in the world. The West seems to have more of an issue with this, and if you force the West to pay billions or trillions of dollars for everything to teach this system, then it simply either won't get done or will get done at a pace that puts the West at a severe disadvantage. In my view, knowledge belongs to everyone. But I also don't want people more closely aligned with my ideals to be hobbled in the area of building these ultimate knowledge databases and tools. It could even be a major national security threat to not let these technologies develop in the way they need to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] BussyGyatt@feddit.org 1 point 2 years ago If the rules are "You gotta pay for the book" and they don't pay for the book, they broke the rules, that's what I consider cheating. I don't necessarily agree with the rule, I disagree with cheating. This is, of course, relative, as truth and morality in general are. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BussyGyatt@feddit.org 1 point 2 years ago If the rules are "You gotta pay for the book" and they don't pay for the book, they broke the rules, that's what I consider cheating. I don't necessarily agree with the rule, I disagree with cheating. This is, of course, relative, as truth and morality in general are. permalink fedilink source parent