We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training data

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by phone8675309 on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @12:18AM (#35163805)

That's an incredibly reductive view. Copyright protects me when I do any creative work, I do not want my creative work to be part of any AI training dataset without my explicit permission, and I want laws that force people training generative AI models to copyright clear all of their training data and moreover be able to show which inputs corresponded to which outputs so the result is auditable.

If Disney trains an AI good enough to just generate a good story then I think that everyone who fed training data into that model should get a piece of the revenue.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by galaxyLogic on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @12:27AM (#35163882)

AI copies everything, except copyright notices. Curious why is that?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by matheusmoreira on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @12:53AM (#35164040)

Reductive for you, maybe. I don't want this technology limited in literally any way. How many times must we go through this? Destroying perfectly good technology because it hurts the copyright industry's interests? I say it's time to end copyright instead. They're holding us back with these concerns.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by meheleventyone on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @03:16AM (#35164946)

This is going to be awkward for the incentive to generate these models which are protected by the same rights.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by PoignardAzur on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @05:51PM (#35175228)

Not that awkward, open source models exist.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by meheleventyone on Thursday March 16, 2023 @07:20AM (#35180538)

Open source uses legal IP protections and removing them would have significant ramifications to open-source licenses.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by PoignardAzur on Thursday March 16, 2023 @11:01AM (#35182846)

You're mixing different issues. Your exact quote was "This is going to be awkward for the incentive to generate these models which are protected by the same rights".

Except right now models are being released openly, with anyone being able to download and fine-tune the weights. Yes, they have licenses, but it's not like the licenses protect some core part of their business models. Whatever incentives they had to release those weights, they would mostly have the same incentives if copyright law disappeared overnight.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by beefield on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @06:12AM (#35166009)

> If Disney trains an AI good enough to just generate a good story then I think that everyone who fed training data into that model should get a piece of the revenue.

So, if Disney decides to incorporate a sailing boat in ther stories, does that mean that anyone who has been making sailing what it is in our culture (i.e. anyone ever been on a boat, built a boat, talked about boats etc) should get a cut? If not, why not?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by Aerroon on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @06:36AM (#35166160)

>If Disney trains an AI good enough to just generate a good story then I think that everyone who fed training data into that model should get a piece of the revenue.

Disney will just commission this art or figure out a neat trick to get artists to give them this permission. Then afterwards they'll turn around and license the model back to all those artists. And those artists are going to pay to remain competitive.

Congratulations, you've now created a monopoly or oligopoly. And the people who lose the most from it are the same artists that demanded this system, because free models will be illegal.

[ Parent | on HN ]