• lennee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      21 hours ago

      it can be fair use as long as it is open. OpenAi used to be a non-profit after all. As it stands now they can go fuck themselves as far as im concerned.

        • lennee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          Cuz AI in the hands of a few is harmful (see elon musks grok he likes to tamper with) and I find it reprehensible to train AI on material that u steal and then paywall the result

          • General_Effort@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            20 hours ago

            It just seems odd to me, you know? AI in the hands of the few is harmful, but if they pay license fees, that can be allowed. Copyright infringement is theft, but it is acceptable if the result is shared freely. I don’t really see how that works.

            • nuggie_ss@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              The result isn’t shared freely because the owners get to dictate what information AI is allowed to give and under what context.

            • RiverRabbits@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 hours ago

              I agree. Generally, I think AI is a net negative in any context or scenario, because of the way the tech is built. The badness of AI is inherent, a priori of any copyright discussion. It’s a garbage creator that lowers the overall quality of any mass-data applications, be it aggregation like search engines or Wikipedia, or entertainment media, like photo search results, videos or books.