trollbearpig

Says while citing "studies" from the fraser institute, a libertarian think tank registered as a charity. Fuck them and fuck you for spreading their propaganda.

https://cepr.net/data-from-bolivias-election-add-more-evidence-that-oas-fabricated-last-years-fraud-claims/

The USA, through the OAS, fabricated a bogus statistics report acussing Evo of stealing the elections. This was the time when the Elon rat tweeted that "they would coup whoever the wanted". Even at the time, a lot of staticians were reporting that the analysis was bogus. The awful woman they put in charge ordered at least 2 massacres against people protesting the coup. And as soon as she let the country had elections, Evo's party won by more than 50% of the vote. Keep in mind that unlike the USA, there are more than 2 parties in Bolivia, so they had more than 20% lead in the vote. It's very obvious that Bolivians want Evo and his party in power. The OAS and USA are full of shit as usual.

The coup at least resulted in 2 term limits being implemented in Bolivia so Evo can't stay in power forever, so not all bad. But the USA can't stop fucking in latin america.

I figure since big tech spent quite a bit of money building those datasets and since they were built before the law, they will be able to keep using them as long as they don't add anything new but I can't be certain.

This is a very weird assumption you are making man. The quoted text you sent above pretty much says the opposite. It says everyone who wants to train their models wirh copyrigthed data needs to get permission from the copyright holders. That is great for me period. No one, not a big company nor the open source community, gets to steal the work of people producing art, code, etc. I honestly don't get why you assume all the data scrapped before would be exempt. Again, very weird assumption.

As for ML algorithms having use, of course they have. Hell, pretty much every company I have worked with has used them for decades. But take a look at the examples you provided. None of them requires you or your company scrapping a bunch of information from randoms on the internet. Specially not copyrighted art, literature, or code. And that's the point here, you are acting like all of that stops with these laws but that's ridiculous.

So you are saying that content scraped before the law is fair game to train new models? If so it's fucking terrible. But again, I doubt this is the case since this would be against the interests of the big copyright holders. And if it's not the case you are just creating a storm in glass of water since this affects the companies too.

As a side point, I'm really curious about LLM uses. As a programmer the only useful product I have seen so far is copilot and similar tools. And I ended up disabling the fucking thing because it produces too much garbage hahaha. But I'm the first to admit I haven't been following this hype cycle hahahaha, so I'm really curious what the big things will be. You clearly know so much, so want to enligten me?

My man, I think you are delisuonal hahahaha. You are giving AI way too much credit to a technology that's just a glorified autocomoplete. But I guess I get your point, if you think that AI (and LLMs in particular hahahaha) is the way of the future and all that, then this is apocalyptic hahahahaha.

But you are delisuonal my man. The only practical use so far for these stupid LLMs is autocomplete which works great when it works. And bypassing copyright law by pretending it's producing novel shit. But that's a whole other discussion, time will show this is just another bubble like crypto hahahaha. For now, I hope they at least force everyone to stop plagiarising other peoples work with AI.

My man, I think you are mixin a lot of things. Let's go by parts.

First, you are right that almost all websites get some copyright rights when you post on their platforms. At best, some license the content as Creative Commons or similar licenses. But that's not new, that has been this way forever. If people are surprised that they are paying with their data at this point I don't know what to say hahaha. The change with this law would be that no one, big tech companies or open source, gets to use this content for free to train new models right?

Which brings me back to my previous question, this law applies to old data too right? You say "new data is not needed" (which is not true for chat LLMs that want to include new data for example), but old data is still needed to use the new methods or to curate the datasets. And most of this old data was acquired by ignoring copyright laws. What I get from this law is that no one, including these companies, gets to keep using this "illegaly" acquired data now right? I mean, I'm pretty sure this is the case since movie studios and similar are the ones pushing for this law, they will not go like "it's ok you stole all our previous libraries, just don't steal the new stuff" hahahaha.

I do get your point that the most likely end result is that movie studios, record labels, social media platforms, etc, will just start selling the rights to train on their data and the only companies who will be able to afford this are the big tech companies. But still, I think this is a net possitive (weird times for me to be on the side of these awful companies hahaha).

First of all, it means no one, including big tech companies, get to steal content that is not theirs or given to them willingly. I'm particularly interested in open source code, but the same applies to indie art and any other form of art outside of the big companies. When we say that we want to stop the plagiarism it's not a joke. Tech companies are using LLMs to attack the open source community by stealing the code under the excuse of LLMs being transformative (bullshit of course). Any law that stops this is a possitive to me.

And second of all, consider the 2 futures we have in front of us. Option one is we get laws like this, forcing AI to comply with copyright law. Which basically means we maintain the current status quo for intellectual property. Not great obviously, but the alrtenative is so much worse. Option two is we allow people to use LLMs to steal all the intellectual property they want, which puts an end to basically any market incentives to produce art by humans. Again, the current copyright system is awful. But why do you guys want a system were we as individuals have to keep complying with copyright but any company can bypass that with an LLM? Or how do you guys think this is going to pan out if we just don't regulate AI?

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand what you guys mean by "the river cannot be dammed". The LLM models need to be retrained all the time to include new data and in general to get them to change their behavior in any way. Wouldn't this bill apply to all these companies as soon as they retrain their models?

I mean, I get the point that old models would be exempt from the law since laws can't be retroactive. But I don't get how that's such a big deal. These companies would be stuck with old models if they refuse to train new ones. And as much hype as there is around AI, current models are still shit for the most part.

Also, can you explain why you guys think this would stop open source models? I have always though that the best solution to stop these fucking plagiarism machines was for the open source community to create an open source training set were people contribute their art/text/whatever. Does this law prevents this? Honestly to me this panic sounds like people without any artistic talent wanted to steal the work of artists and they are now mad they can't do it.

Maybe read the text? It has nothing to do with prefering iOS. It's just google refused to comply with China's spyware requests some time ago (a broken clock and all that), so it's literally impossible to use android for this in China. Apple on the other hand is happy to suck China's dick hahahaha, so it's the only option. Man, you Apple fans are really brainwashed, this is a bad look for Apple hahahah.

Hahahahah. First, nice strawman. I have never said that all problems in latin america were caused by the USA. You gringos are really touchy with criticism for a country that loves to support coups.

Second, look here https://www.vox.com/2020/5/11/21249203/venezuela-coup-jordan-goudreau-maduro-guaido-explain for example of the ridiculous coup attempt made by the US government in Venezuela. And this was after they had declared Guaido as president and blockaded Venezuela. Note that the equipment and training were provided by US personel. Hell, they even arrested 2 gringos hahaha. It was so patethic that there is no denying anything here my dude. I love how incompetent Trump was, I honestly wish he wins again because of shit like this hahahahaha.

For Bolivia just check this https://cepr.net/data-from-bolivias-election-add-more-evidence-that-oas-fabricated-last-years-fraud-claims/. The OAS, lead by the fearless USA, fabricated evidence to justify a coup. I mean, as soon as they had new elections Evo's party won by a landslide hahaha. The only reason he is not president is because they now have 2 term limits, which is great IMO. So the coup did do something good hahahaha.

As for Colombia being punished, just look at the declarations from fucking Rubio in https://colombiaone.com/2024/06/13/colombia-us-aid-cut/. They cut the "aid" they provide us just because we picked a left wing president. Note that this "aid" is used to combat narcotrafic on behalf of the USA, wiith Colombia spending even more of our own money. Note that a lot of Colombians, myself included, would like to move towards legalization instead of continuing the war on drugs. But the USA threatens us with a blockade everytime a serious attempt is made.

I could keep going, but I'm pretty sure you are just going to downvote and ignore everything I said hahahaha.

Nah, we don't do both. Carbon capture projects are bullshit for the most part, see https://time.com/6264772/study-most-carbon-credits-are-bogus/ for example. Some are actually generating more carbon, not less overall. Instead, companies have been using this as a way to "buy" their target metrics, except they are buying offsets that don't really exist. And they use this to market their products as green/net zero products, which incentivizes even more consumption.

So overall this whole thing is most likely a net negative, as in we would be better without them. And honestly is not surprising at all, technology is not magic. It's just people want perfect solutions so we don't have to do anything and the problem goes away, so they keep falling for this bullshit. Case in point, your comment lol.

My man, what an empty comment. Honestly you just made me sad. Just a bunch of insults showing how empty your brain is hahahaha.

I did read your entire comment and even the linked article. Too bad you said nothing in so many words though. Just excuses about how unique your country is as usual.

We are, just one step at a time my man. There are plans to create a train system conecting Bogotá with the closest towns for example. But we have to fight every step of the way for it hahaha. But at least we are moving in the right direction. Enjoy your moral superiority about doing nothing though. I'm sure if you guys keep complaining things will improve on their own hahaha.