Had the company paid for the training data and/or left it as voluntary, there would be less of a problem with it to begin with.
Part of the problem is that they didn’t, but are still using it for commercial purposes.
Comment on The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates
Shanedino@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Maybe if you would pay for training data they would let you use copyright data or something?
T156@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Shanedino@lemmy.world 5 months ago
The other part of it is they broke the rules so they need to face the consequences. They are asking for forgiveness and in this case I don’t think they deserve it.
andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 5 months ago
Their business strategy is built on top of assumption they won’t. They don’t want this door opened at all. It was a great deal for Google to buy Reddit’s data for some $mil., because it is a huge collection behind one entity. Now imagine communicating to each individual site owner whose resources they scrapped.
If that could’ve been how it started, the development of these AI tools could be much slower because of (1) data being added to the bunch only after an agreement, (2) more expenses meaning less money for hardware expansion and (3) investors and companies being less hyped up about that thing because it doesn’t grow like a mushroom cloud while following legal procedures. Also, (4) the ability to investigate and collect a public list of what sites they have agreement with is pretty damning making it’s own news stories and conflicts.