What of the images random people generate from software like dall e? Those are made from the same training data, and what this poicy does to them is make media creation more inaccessible even though the technology exists. Also, copying a book word for word by hand isnt/wasnt plagarism, its unlicensed duplication. Plagarism would be changing just the proper nouns and pretending like its a completely seperate book
Comment on The AI-focused COPIED Act would make removing digital watermarks illegal
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 months agoI get what you’re saying, but there’s something of a difference between someone studying something for months or years then writing about it, and a language model ran by one of the tech giants scraping media and immediately generating stuff from it, for commercial use, for the profit of the company that owns it.
It’s kinda like how plagiarising somebody’s book word for word never used to be a crime when it was a painstaking process of manually writing it back out for every copy. When the printing press came out, though? It allowed dodgy businesses to large-scale fuck over authors, and the law had to play catch-up.
I don’t think we should think of AI models or corporations as being people. They shouldn’t necessarily have the same rights and privileges that we do.
IzzyJ@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Evotech@lemmy.world 2 months ago
There’s a lot of private people training models (Lora, Dora’s etc) / fine-tuning checkpoints and what have you
Training models is not just giant tech corps anymore
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I know, I have one running locally on my PC, it’s neat.
I still don’t think that changes my point, though - a large AI model, particularly one that can scrape the whole web of any content it can find, then immediately be used to generate content is very different to the idea of a little 8 year old in a library reading books.
And I still maintain that companies aren’t people and shouldn’t necessarily have the same rights as a person.