• Alloi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    “you cant POSSIBLY expect us, to respect HUMAN RIGHTS if we want progress? i mean the survival of the human species (me and my friends) relies on cheap and free labour and the starvation, death, and exploitation of the masses. if we want to SURVIVE as a species (me and my friends) WE GOTTA EXPLOIT THE PEOPLE”

  • andallthat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    “you can’t have a successful government when every time I want to be President or have sex with minors or anything else you have the right to do as a rich, white man, you have to hear people get all judgy”

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    It tracks, his entire career has been spent getting other people to pay for stuff for him

  • OccamsRazer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    Not sure why the knee jerk hate on this one. I like the idea of opening up academic articles and other materials for free and open use.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s the fact that it’s not free and open use to us, just to the AI trainers. At least that’s what the judges seem to be saying at this point.

      • FatCrab@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That is not what judges have said. They’ve said that merely training on text is not a copyright infringement. However, companies that downloaded enormous amounts of pirated texts (i.e., stuff they did not have license to download in the first place) still infringed copyright just like anybody else. Effectively the courts have been holding that if you study material you have license to access, you aren’t infringing, but if you pirate that material, even if it is merely to study it, it’s still infringing. For better or worse this is basically basically how it’s always been.

        I have no idea what Trump is proposing. Like most republicans, but especially him, he is incapable of even approaching understanding of nuanced and technical areas of law and/or technology.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          However, companies that downloaded enormous amounts of pirated texts (i.e., stuff they did not have license to download in the first place) still infringed copyright just like anybody else.

          I thought only the distribution part was copyright infringement.

          • paraphrand@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            Not in this ruling. A hoard of books or videos you didn’t pay for is still piracy. And the volume of it is a key factor when making this decision. At the scale these AI companies have been working, it’s flagrant.

        • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          5 months ago

          He essentially admitted he can’t train a freaking machine without free study materials. But never even thinks to extend that courtesy to actual human beings!

          Keeping us dumb on purpose, while giving AI an advantage.

      • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        No he means only to who donated at least $1 mil to his inauguration

        Regular people will still be fucked if they torrent a single ebook

  • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    5 months ago

    Don’t spend one more dollar on educational material. If a person had to pay for every textbook and online subscription, education would be impractical.

  • TooManyFoods@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    The only important thing is to make rich people money. If it makes them money, nothing else matters. Unless it makes them money now as opposed to later. Making them money now is the most important thing.

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    Then maybe AI “programs” aren’t a good product. Next it will be, “we can’t be expected to make a good murderbot without murdering some people”

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Proceeds to start wars with every ethnicity to ensure the murder bots are trained to kill all variants of the population. “Of course they have to kill little people, how else will we know that a little person couldn’t judo chop them to death.”

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 months ago

    So let’s pretend we give them all the training data they want for free (which they already have taken illegally)

    The buisness model is still non-viable because the energy costs far outweigh any subscriptions they can get. And the tech isn’t even good enough for people to want to subscribe at the current prices.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    5 months ago

    “You can’t be expected to get a successful higher education when every article, book, or anything else that you’ve read or studied, you’re supposed to pay for.”