Technology

37717 readers

407 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Amazon- and Google-backed AI firm Anthropic says “general-purpose AI tools simply could not exist” if AI companies had to pay licences for the training material (www.computerweekly.com)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

74 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) company Anthropic has claimed to a US court that using copyrighted content in large language model (LLM) training data counts as “fair use”, however.

Under US law, “fair use” permits the limited use of copyrighted material without permission, for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching, and research.

In October 2023, a host of music publishers including Concord, Universal Music Group and ABKCO initiated legal action against the Amazon- and Google-backed generative AI firm Anthropic, demanding potentially millions in damages for the allegedly “systematic and widespread infringement of their copyrighted song lyrics”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And yet, it seems when you say anything anti-ai, lemmy bites your head off.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

We are allowed to have nuance, nothing is inherently good or bad. A knife can wound or make dinner.

Trying to reduce nuance lessens the public discourse, do not be tempted by lowest common denominator memery.

Whether anyone likes it or not LLMs are here and even if we strictly regulate them there will be organizations and governments that do not.

WHAT WE SHOULD be focusing on is how to prevent low effort AI content from just basically overtaking the web.

We are already mostly there.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You can't prevent it without regulations. Companies won't care while gaining money from it unless they're obligated to, and even then, some won't comply either.

BTW, that mentality of "other countries vs mine" is absurd. War crimes shouldn't be committed by a country just because the other commits them; others bad ≠ I good.

LLMs can't and should NOT replace a human, at least not yet (they're not even that good either). If we can't have guaranteed basic needs such as housing, food and healthcare or a BUI, then they should not keep leaving people without jobs because no one will be able to afford anything.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

You can't prevent it WITH regulation.

Just like illegal dumping: If it makes the company more than the fine, it is just a cost of business.

BTW, that mentality of “other countries vs mine” is absurd.

China will never agree to a limitation of tech advancement because that is their primary source of wealth, and frankly your comment shows a tragic lack of understanding on international affairs.

This isn't 'us good them bad', this is 'China has a history of ignoring technology patents and restrictions in order to gain international advantage. The fact that you assumed that I had petty reasons makes it clear you have nothing to contribute to this conversation.