I’ve recently noticed this opinion seems unpopular, at least on Lemmy.

There is nothing wrong with downloading public data and doing statistical analysis on it, which is pretty much what these ML models do. They are not redistributing other peoples’ works (well, sometimes they do, unintentionally, and safeguards to prevent this are usually built-in). The training data is generally much, much larger than the model sizes, so it is generally not possible for the models to reconstruct random specific works. They are not creating derivative works, in the legal sense, because they do not copy and modify the original works; they generate “new” content based on probabilities.

My opinion on the subject is pretty much in agreement with this document from the EFF: https://www.eff.org/document/eff-two-pager-ai

I understand the hate for companies using data you would reasonably expect would be private. I understand hate for purposely over-fitting the model on data to reproduce people’s “likeness.” I understand the hate for AI generated shit (because it is shit). I really don’t understand where all this hate for using public data for building a “statistical” model to “learn” general patterns is coming from.

I can also understand the anxiety people may feel, if they believe all the AI hype, that it will eliminate jobs. I don’t think AI is going to be able to directly replace people any time soon. It will probably improve productivity (with stuff like background-removers, better autocomplete, etc), which might eliminate some jobs, but that’s really just a problem with capitalism, and productivity increases are generally considered good.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    103 months ago

    As someone who doesn’t hate AI, I hate a few things about how it’s happening:

    • If I want to make a book, and I want to use other books for reference, I need to obtain them legally. Purchase, rent, loan… Else I’m a pirate. Multimillion companies say for them it’s fine as long as somebody posted it on the internet. Their version of annas-archive is suddenly legal and moral, while I’m harming the authors if I use it.
    • They are stuffing everything with AI, which generally means internet connection and sending unknown data.
    • It’s an annoying marketing gimmick. While incredible useful in some places, the insistence that it solves all the problems make it seem as a failure.
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -23 months ago

      I think your issue moreso lies on copyright laws than the LLM datasets origination then. Which I completely understand, I hate copyright laws.

      There’s TV shows that I can’t stream and the only legal way to watch them is to buy the box set for £90. Get fucked I’m not paying that, I’ll just download it for free.