this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
1582 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
59986 readers
2834 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If openai gets to use copyrighted content for free, then so should every one else.
If that happens, no point making anything, since your stuff will get stolen anyway
I'm okay with it if they do some kind of open source GPL style license for the copyrighted material, like you can use all the material in the world to train your model, but you can't sell your model for money if it was trained on copyrighted material.
You absolutely CAN sell GPL-licensed applications for money.
To clarify, you can sell GPL licensed programs but any GPL licensed software us inherently worth 0$, because the first person that buys it is now able to give it away for free.
Yet, people still pay for it.
An optional fee is a donation.
Donation, patronage, gift economy, mutual aid, or whatever you want to call it is fine by me. People can pirate a lot of proprietary software as well, yet people still pay.
Piracy has clear downsides with proprietary software in most cases. Lack of updates and support are big ones. Also its considered moral to pay for your software.
These same arguments are equally true for GPL software.
Yeah but then they'd be more of a support company that also happens to create the service. You could pay anyone for support it doesnt have to be the primary source.
From a capitalist's point of view, yes, but we need a society that enables people to act from other incentives than making money. And there are plenty of other reasons to make things.
AI is the capitalist dream. Exploit the labor and creativity of others without paying them a cent.
Everyone else does. Name one thing you have to pay for to view on the internet...lmfao
Yes, people turned a blind eye towards OpenAI because they were supposedly an "open" non-profit company working towards the benefit of humanity. They got tons of top talent and investment because of this. The crazy part is that they knew they weren't gonna keep it non-profit based on the internal chat revealed in Elon Musk's lawsuit. They duped the whole world and now just trying to make as much money as possible.
In my opinion, if they were to release these models openly and everyone had equal opportunity to benefit from their research (just like the previous research their current stuff is based on), they could be excused but this for-profit business model is the main problem.
There is a lot of people still buying official merchandising from bands and anime etc, and subscribing to patreon and similar Mecenazgo channels (translate the spanish wiki article, because weirdly the english one does not have a version of this basic topic), even if they can just pirate the music and buy cheaper knockoffs (or just buy normal waterbottles instead). I think art will still get make through that, and because artistic vocation will still exist. Stuff where material scarcity still exists will continue to get sold of course, since making infinite anime furry porn movies in chat gpt will not feed your belly.
Pay me upfront to make it, subscribe to my patron. If you need my intellectual property to be guaranteed then pay me for a SLA support contract.
Otherwise everything I make is out some other interest and your benifit is just an unintended consequence or because of some charitable notion on my part.
Its crazy how much of the world is actually just this and not some nebulas notion on artificial scarcity of the idea of the things (IP).
Trademark would arguably be uneffected though since that has more to do with fraud protections.