Fuck AI

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/21436155

Campaigners for the protection of the rights of creatives have criticised a UK government proposal to let artificial intelligence companies train their algorithms on their works under a new copyright exemption.

Book publishers said the proposal put out for consultation on Tuesday was “entirely untested and unevidenced” while Beeban Kidron, a crossbench peer campaigning to protect artists’ and creatives’ rights, said she was “very disappointed”.

Under the proposals, tech companies will be allowed to freely use copyrighted material to train artificial intelligence models unless creative professionals and companies opt out of the process.

The changes are seeking to resolve a standoff between AI firms and creatives. Sir Paul McCartney has warned the technology “could just take over” without new laws while the government has warned “legal uncertainty is undermining investment in and adoption of AI technology.”

On Tuesday, News media organisations said that such a system would allow generative AI firms to “shirk their responsibilities”. Kidron said: “The government is consulting on giving away the creativity and livelihoods of the UK creative sector which is worth £126bn a year”.

Tech UK, which represents tech companies, welcomed the consultation, which proposes an exception to UK laws preventing the use of someone’s work without permission – that will allow companies such as Google and the ChatGPT developer OpenAI to train their models on copyrighted content.

However, it will also allow writers, artists and composers to “reserve their rights”, which involves declaring that they do not want their work to be used in an AI training process . The government said there needed to be greater transparency from AI developers about the material they use to train models, how they acquire it, and about the content subsequently generated and it said it could legislate around this.

Chris Bryant MP, the data protection minister, said the proposal was a “win win” for two sides that have been at loggerheads over a new copyright regime.

“This is about giving greater control in a difficult and complex set of circumstances to creators and rights holders, and we intend it to lead to more licensing of content, which is potentially a new revenue stream for creators,” he said.

Campaigners for creatives fear a mechanism to reserve, license and be paid for the use of their work in AI training, would probably only benefit the largest rights holders leaving small and medium-scale creators exposed.

I was able to get chat got to get me yo mamma joke!...not jokes, singular, one.

Archive

Last month, a detective in a small town outside of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, invited dozens of high school girls and their parents to the police station to undertake a difficult task: one by one, the girls were asked to confirm that they were depicted in hundreds of AI-generated deepfake pornographic images seized by law enforcement.

In a series of back-to-back private meetings, Detective Laurel Bair of the Susquehanna Regional Police Department slid each image out from under the folder’s cover, so only the girl’s face was shown, unless the families specifically requested to see the entire uncensored image.
[…]
The photos were part of a cache of images allegedly taken from 60 girls’ public social media accounts by two teenage boys, who then created 347 AI-generated deepfake pornographic images and videos, according to the Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office. The two boys have now been criminally charged with 59 counts of “sexual abuse of children,” and 59 counts of “posession of child pornography,” among other charges, including “possession of obscene materials depicting a minor.”

Forty-eight of the 60 victims were their classmates at Lancaster Country Day School, a small private school approximately 80 miles west of Philadelphia. The school is so small that nearly half of the high school’s female students were victimized in the images and videos. The scale of the underage victims makes this the largest-known instance of deepfake pornography made of minors in the United States.
[…]
Experts say that it is rare for criminal charges to be brought in deepfake pornography cases where both the victims and the perpetrators are minors.

“My guess [as to why there aren’t more such prosecutions] is just that there may be a general recognition that arresting children isn’t going to resolve this,” Riana Pfefferkorn, a policy fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence who has long studied the intersection of child sexual abuse material and AI, told Forbes.

How about I sue Google for getting my voice without me knowingly aware so that it could train its AI model? How about that? How about you, Google, remove that shit immediately and stop spying on me?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/138981

Comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/33104502

The Prophet

I can't wait for the spectacular implosion

Reddit has filed for its IPO. They've been preparing for this for a while, squeezing profit out of the platform in any way that they can, like hiking the prices on third-party app developers. More recently, they've signed a deal with Google to license their content to train Google's LLMs.

To celebrate this momentous occasion, we've made a Firefox extension that will replace all your comments (older than a certain number of days) with any text that you provide. You can use any text that you want, but please, do not choose something copyrighted. The New York Times is currently suing OpenAI for training ChatGPT on its copyrighted material. Reddit's data is uniquely valuable, since it's not subject to those kinds of copyright restrictions, so it would be tragic if users were to decide to intermingle such a robust corpus of high-quality training data with copyrighted text.

Here's that extension link again. To all our friends at Reddit, we wish you all the success that you deserve!

File this under "delusional CEO says 'what' "

Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman predicts conversational AI will become the primary way people interact with technology, replacing traditional web browsers and search engines within the next few years. In an interview with The Verge, Suleyman, who oversees Microsoft's consumer AI products including Bing and Copilot, called current search interfaces "completely broken" and "a total pain," arguing that voice-based AI interactions will prove "100 times easier" for users. He said:

The UI that you experience is going to be automagically produced by an LLM in three or five years, and that is going to be the default. And they'll be representing the brands, businesses, influencers, celebrities, academics, activists, and organizations, just as each one of those stakeholders in society ended up getting a podcast, getting a website, writing a blog, maybe building an app, or using the telephone back in the day.

The technological revolution produces a new interface, which completely shuffles the way that things are distributed. And some organizations adapt really fast and they jump on board and it kind of transforms their businesses and their organizations, and some don't. There will be an adjustment. We'll look back by 2030 and be like, "Oh, that really was the kind of moment when there was this true inflection point because these conversational AIs really are the primary way that we have these interactions." And so, you're absolutely right. A brand and a business are going to use that AI to talk to your personal companion AI because I don't really like doing that kind of shopping. And some people do, and they'll do that kind of direct-to-consumer browsing experience. Many people don't like it, and it's actually super frustrating, hard, and slow.

And so, increasingly you'll come to work with your personal AI companion to go and be that interface, to go and negotiate, find great opportunities, and adapt them to your specific context. That'll just be a much more efficient protocol because AIs can talk to AIs in super real-time. And by the way, let's not fool ourselves. We already have this on the open web today. We have behind-the-scenes, real-time negotiation between buyers and sellers of ad space, or between search ranking algorithms. So, there's already that kind of marketplace of AIs. It's just not explicitly manifested in language. It's operating in vector space.

    (archived link)

Literally insane.

Want to stop chatGPT from crawling your website? Just mention Australian mayor Brian Hood (or any of the other names listed in the article)

When asked about these names, ChatGPT responds with "I'm unable to produce a response" or "There was an error generating a response" before terminating the chat session, according to Ars' testing. The names do not affect outputs using OpenAI's API systems or in the OpenAI Playground (a special site for developer testing).

The filter also means that it's likely that ChatGPT won't be able to answer questions about this article when browsing the web, such as through ChatGPT with Search. Someone could use that to potentially prevent ChatGPT from browsing and processing a website on purpose if they added a forbidden name to the site's text.