There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Drewelite

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates (lemmy.world)

Those claiming AI training on copyrighted works is “theft” misunderstand key aspects of copyright law and AI technology. Copyright protects specific expressions of ideas, not the ideas themselves. When AI systems ingest copyrighted works, they’re extracting general patterns and concepts - the “Bob Dylan-ness” or...

Drewelite ,

Fully agree. I understand why there are many technological doomers out there and I think AI may be the most deserving of a critical eye. But the immense benefits of being able to manufacture intelligence is undeniable. That NECESSITATES the AI being able to observe anything and everything in the world that it can. That’s how any known intelligence has ever learned and there’s no scientific basis for an intelligence coming into existence knowing everything about the world without it ever being taught about it.

Now I’ve heard a lot of criticism of AI. Some really legitimate concerns about their place in the future (and ours). As well as the ethics of this important technology originating in the private hands of mega corps that historically have not had our best interest at heart. But the VAST majority of criticism has been about how it’s not useful or is just an avenue for copyright abuse. Which at best, is just completely missing the point. But at worst, is the thinly vailed protests of people made very uncomfortable that the status quo is being upset.

Drewelite ,

I think what you’re forgetting is that intelligence, in general, is an emergent property of recording information and learning what actions to take based on them. The current work on AI is essentially trying to take this evolutionary behavior, make it less random, and compress the cycles of iteration down so that intelligence emerges quickly. This whole argument “It’s not smart like I’m smart” with only surface level observation about it’s current state and no critical observation about how intelligence came to be, just sounds really insecure.

I get it. Humans will likely not be the smartest thing in the arena soon. But stating matter-of-factly that AI is inherently different is born from an emotional viewpoint. I understand there ARE differences, but no more so then how there are differences between a human and a dog. Which if you’re honestly looking at the situation is impressively close to human intelligence in such a short time.

Drewelite ,

You’re making an indie movie on your iPhone with friends. You sell one ticket. You now owe: Apple, Joseph Nicéphore Niépce’s estate (inventor of the camera), every cinematographer who first devised the type of shots you’re using, the writers since the beginning of time that created the types of story elements in the script, the mathematicians and scientists that developed lense technology, the car manufacturers that aided your ability to transport you to the set, the guy who’s YouTube tutorial you watched to figure out lighting, etc, etc, etc.

Your black and white framing appears to provide a clear ethical framework until you dig a millimeter into it. The reality is that society only exists because of the work that all of the individuals within it produce. Things like copyright are an adapter to our capitalistic economy to ensure people’s work that can be copied, are protected enough that they have the opportunity to make money off of it. It exists so somebody else can’t immediately turn around and sell the same book someone else wrote, or just change a few words and do as such. This protection was meant to last 15 to 20 years. Then enter the public domain for anyone to copy and rewrite as they please.

Current copyright is an utter bastardization of its intended use. Massive corporations are trying to act like they’re fighting for the little guy to own their IP forever. But they buy up all that IP for pennies compared to how they turn around and commoditize it. Then they own all of what society produces in perpetuity. They can sit on their dragon hoards and laugh as they gobble up any new creation that strays too close. And people wonder why everything is a sequel of a sequel of a sequel owned by massive corporations.

Drewelite , (edited )

By that rationalization, OpenAI is paying their Internet bill, and for a copy of Dune, so they’re free to use any content they acquired to make their product better. Your original argument wasn’t akin to, “Shouldn’t someone using an iPhone pay for one?” It was “Shouldn’t Apple get a cut of everything made with the iPhone?”

You could make the argument that people use ChatGPT to churn out garbage content, sure, but a lot of cinephiles would accuse your proverbial indie movie of being the same and blame Apple for creating the iPhone and enabling it. If you want to make that argument, go ahead. But don’t pretend it has anything to do with people getting paid fairly for what they made.

ChatGPT is enabling people to make more things, easier, to get paid. And people, as always, are relying on everything that was created before them as a basis for their work. Same as when I go to school and the professor shows me lots of different works to learn from. The thousands of students in that class didn’t pay for any of that stuff. The professor distilled it and presented it and I paid him to do it.

Drewelite ,

If Apple (or any metaphorical creator you want to insert in here) doesn’t want you using their product to make your movie, too bad. You bought their product. Even if millions of people end up watching your movie, they can’t turn around and ask for any more. You acquired their product fairly like anybody else. Your transaction is done. If they don’t like it, they should ask every person who’s ever made or contributed to any version of the components in their device and see how they feel about it.

Now people using ChatGPT to impersonate artists shouldn’t do that. But those individual people should be prosecuted. Nobody’s confused that Andy Warhol might be quickly painting the pictures and sending them over in the DALL-E chat and you can’t honestly make the argument that people aren’t buying Stephen King books because they can type “Write me a Stephen King novel” into the prompt generator.

Drewelite ,

I think your mentality is great. I’ve heard people say, “Sure I’ll eat a burger, but what kind of psychopath wants to kill an animal themselves?”

I don’t know, what kind of a psychopath pays an industry to do it for them so they don’t have to feel bad about it? Look, I get it, I don’t hunt. But I respect the people who respectfully end the animal’s life themselves. Only they can really understand the cost. We just throw away some old chicken we forgot to cook while passing judgment on who we paid to get it for us and how they did it.

Drewelite ,

Perhaps this is the perspective people need.

Drewelite ,

Or if anyone’s job or hobby requires transporting more than can be carried on a bike trailer. Anyone living rurally. Anyone famous. People with mental conditions exacerbated by being enclosed with strangers. All that being said, I’d love to see a shift towards it being more popular.

Drewelite ,

What if they’re an electrician/plumber/repair man that needs a full kit of equipment and drives all over town. A contractor building a house transporting materials. A school/church/daycare transporting kids that doesn’t want to have them loose on public transport. Garbage man. Emergency services. Food delivery. Etc

Drewelite ,

Well, also this is nothing new, unfortunately. See Lolis. Or maybe don’t…

Drewelite , (edited )

There are a lot of things that “Western” medicine took from other cultures and then turn around and brand them pseudoscience barbarians for the remainder that didn’t work. Like a lot of modern concepts of psychology from India. Medicines from indigenous Americans . Etc.

Also worth noting that the remaining knowledge base was deemed “pseudoscience” by the scientific community of yesteryear and a lot has changed. I’m not promoting unproven potentially dangerous alternative medicines. But I am saying it’s worth re reviewing them from time to time. The Mayans had a very modern understanding of astronomy, for example.

Drewelite ,

Yeah the thing that is so hard is that none of the individual actions feel successful. But overtime they pay off. You have to build a guest house for happiness and keep it clean. So the next time he shows up, maybe he’ll stay awhile.

Drewelite ,

I think this comment misses the point that even one doctored photo created by a team of highly skilled individuals can change the course of history. And when that’s what it takes, it’s easier to sell it to the public.

What matters is the source. What we’re being forced to reckon with now is: the assumption that photos capture indisputable reality has never and will never be true. That’s why we invented journalism. Ethically driven people to investigate and be impartial sources of truth on what’s happening in the world. But we’ve neglected and abused the profession so much that it’s a shell of what we need it to be.

Drewelite ,

If you’re getting your truth from somewhere you don’t trust, you’ve already lost the plot. Having a medium to convey absolute truth is NOT the exception, because it never existed. Not with first hand accounts, not with photos, not with videos. Anything, from its inception, has been able to be faked by someone motivated enough.

What we need is an industry of independent ethically driven individuals to investigate and be a trusted source of truth on the world’s important events. Then they can release journals about their findings. We can call them journalers or something, I don’t know, I don’t have all the answers. Too bad nothing like that exists when we need it most 🥲

Drewelite ,

So, shouldn’t the pretense that images are sources of truth evaporating, be a good thing?

Drewelite ,

I’m not talking about vetting pictures. I’m talking about journalists who investigate issues THEMSELVES and uncover the truth. They take their OWN pictures and post them on their website and accounts putting their credibility as collateral. We trust them, not because it’s a picture, but because of who took it.

This already happened with text, people learned “Don’t believe everything you read!” And invented the press to figure out the truth. It used to be a core part of our society. But people were tricked into thinking pictures and video were somehow mediums of empirical truth, just because it’s HARD to fake. But never impossible. Which is worse, actually. So we neglected the press and let it collapse into a shit show because we thought we could do it ourselves.

Drewelite ,

All hail the nail and gear 😉

Drewelite , (edited )

Big question with a lot of nuance and different angles you could approach from. What I think will clarify some things: the emotional side of liberal vs conservatives is that one side sees how humanity could be better and strives for that change, while the other worries that we’ll get worse and resist the change.

Well for quite some time, things have been rapidly changing like no other time in history due in large part to advancements in technology. Both sides can see that we’ve ended up in some dark places as a result and generally the world is more confusing, divided, and stressful than ever.

In reality there is a lot of great progress that we’ve made in recent times. But people who are slow to adapt don’t see it that way, which makes them extremely uncomfortable and left feeling like it totally justifies their philosophy. But nobody is listening because the popular media shuts them out.

So basically they’re throwing a huge temper tantrum and trying to kick over the sand castle everyone else has worked so hard to build, because they feel fed up, self-righteous, and ignored. They don’t see it that way, of course, they feel they’re renegades tearing down a godless society and saving the world. They vote for a buffoon because they’re tired of that idea being weaponized against them, so they’re owning it. With him they’re able to take center stage and be so loud and in your face that you can’t ignore them.

Drewelite ,

Yeah, why would a farmer need a fancy calculator the size of a room? 🙄

Against all odds, an asteroid mining company (AstroForge) appears to be making headway (arstechnica.com)

On Tuesday the co-founders announced that they have successfully raised $40 million in Series A funding and shared plans for their next two missions. AstroForge has now raised a total of $55 million to date....

Drewelite ,

“I wish we could mine without destroying the environment”

“Well what if we mined in space instead?”

“Why don’t you focus on the problems here on Earth buddy. Wow what an idiot. Can you believe that guy?”

Drewelite ,

If you engineer for it, you can send up a machine to fabricate the miners with raw resources. Then you just have to send up a couple starter miners and you never have to send another rocket up. Infinite resources down (limited by time). Solar power to drive the machines. Hell the manufacturer can double as basic initial processing plant and drop purified metals.

Drewelite ,

There are tons of artists that copy others very closely. There are plenty of examples of A.I. making all kinds of unique and quirky artwork despite drawing from artworks. Feels like you’re backing into the grey area of option so that you can stick to a framework that fits a narrative.

Drewelite ,

God I hope it ends up splitting off Chrome. I think Google has done a great job with Chrome. But the recent Manifest v3 makes it clear they’re going to greatly degrade their users’ experience for Google’s bottom line. And they’re using their market dominance to do it.

Drewelite ,

That’s what they want to focus on. And hey, that’s great. But there’s no reason they need to limit how a user installed plugin can filter API requests. Ad blockers and the like were tools to help with the ads and tracking issue. So it’s great Google’s trying to help. But it mostly just seems like PR at this point.

Drewelite ,

Are you saying in 80 years when Blizzard is no more they should release all the code to run your own WoW MMO servers?

Drewelite ,

I’m aware that exists. But the experience of an MMO on a community server must be pretty different (but I don’t know).

If the desire is to not lose the experience after the company shutters the project, I’m not really sure that’s possible. Maybe it is for WoW. But I can certainly imagine a game like Pokemon Go or something being developed by an indie dev that works by orchestrating live real-time events depending on players locations. Would this game even be allowed in the EU following this law? They can’t allow users personal locations to be released, they can’t create a game they can’t eventually fully release to the public. Even if they found a way to strip out users locations, the experience would be completely broken. So what’s the answer? Just don’t innovate in that space?

Drewelite ,

Yeah I agree with the single player bit. And even multiplayer if it’s as simple as releasing the server app. But I think Thor’s point and what’s being debated here is that live service games often aren’t like that. So why is this law seemingly including them?

If you don’t like live service games and don’t feel like they should exist, then don’t buy them. I can see some legislation around clear marketing. But if people want to pay for an ephemeral service, that’s up to the consumer.

Drewelite ,

Well it sounds like they’re doing something to make their products better, you just disagree that it’s going to be successful.

Drewelite ,

Don’t… Use them?

Drewelite ,

Or, you know, put regular gas in that DeLorean and go get the food yourself. Acting entitled to food delivery and also hating the food delivery service that’s able to stay in business is kinda silly.

Drewelite ,

Why are liberals being so negative about Kamala’s progress? I get that we need people to not be complacent and go vote. But feeling like it’s hopeless is just as good as getting people to stay at home. We need to celebrate the support if we want to keep it, you know.

Drewelite ,

“Why won’t women just accept that men should be in charge?!”

Drewelite ,

Which is why I think it’s wild people want to throw on the brakes now that we’re affecting the entire earth. I mean I understand that it seems like we’ve ended up in a bad spot ecologically if you only take the last 100 years into account. But why stop right on the most toxic version of humanity? Let’s push forward to our solarpunk future as soon as possible.

Drewelite ,

Sci-fi is a little more about theorizing science before it gets there. I feel like philosophy is more like: “Why are we looking for the cat?”

It ascribes meaning to the actions that science makes possible. I can find that cat if I use science. But why do I want the cat and what will I do once I have it?

Drewelite ,

Why are all these comments making me love this design? 😂

Drewelite ,

I’ve known some workaholics, And they can be pretty oblivious to everything that isn’t in the lane of their work life. Their own health, already born children, basic life stuff, etc… Also stress induced amenorrhea is a thing .

This psycho should absolutely go to prison. But it’s possible she’s at least being honest.

Drewelite ,

Well wouldn’t SCOTUS not accept the changes until they deem them valid? (which they won’t)

Drewelite ,

That’s the cool part, you won’t. If everything crucial is automated, people can drive things forward for passion rather than for money. Of course, this would effectively collapse capitalism, which won’t happen painlessly.

Drewelite ,

They won’t need maintenance if they’re a general purpose intelligence. A technology that has the possibility to free all of humanity from scarcity, has the possibility to finally collapse dominance of aristocracy for good. Sure, they’ll try and put themselves on top somehow. But once the knowledge exists, anyone can create a version for the greater good.

Drewelite ,

That’s the goal ain’t it? Imma need y’all’s help.

Drewelite ,

No better fuel for an extremist ideology then having a martyr. Trump isn’t the problem, it’s the millions who listen to him.

Drewelite ,

They’re still waving the Confederate flag. What makes you think bullets will kill this ideology in round 2?

Drewelite ,

And how do you kill the ideology? By having the most successful voice of it ultimately accomplish nothing and die as a sad old man.

There’s a reason his rhetoric has been: “The election was stolen!” Because that feeling is powerful, that they were right on the cusp of doing something great, if only the enemy hadn’t poisoned it. It’s got the right mix of victimization and hope that really motivates a movement. You’ll get that 10x now that he’s victimized. And you’d get it 20x if he’s martyred.

Drewelite ,

He’s the only one because he’s still around. If he died yesterday we’d have someone new leading the charge by election time.

You’ve specifically pointed out ideologies that weren’t allowed to die because of how oppressed they were. I’m not suggesting we shouldn’t have fought the Nazis, but victory inherently creates an oppressed underdog that people love to rally around.

The ideologies that die are the ones that fail on their own and people lose faith in. Think monarchies, feudalism, mercantilism, the OG version of Communism, colonialism, etc… So ideally we won’t want to use force if at all possible. Let them lose election after election until they realize they’ve alienated too many people to ever be successful.

Drewelite ,

Ron DeSantis already tried. He only failed because Trump is still around. The GOP learned that they need to wait for him to leave the scene before they try again.

Drewelite ,

Yeah, Trump’s first presidency showed that he was a moron. He’s not the dangerous part. The dangerous part are the millions that worship him. Assassination, or worse, attempted assassination, is a surefire way to make sure that ideology never dies.

The AI-focused COPIED Act would make removing digital watermarks illegal (as well as training any kind of AI on copyrighted content) (www.theverge.com)

A bipartisan group of senators introduced a new bill to make it easier to authenticate and detect artificial intelligence-generated content and protect journalists and artists from having their work gobbled up by AI models without their permission....

Drewelite ,

With all respect, your argument has a pretty obvious emotional valence. You don’t care if the result is 1:1, you care that it happened in a way that makes you uncomfortable. Art can be an outlet for self expression and no one is taking that away. What’s it to you if I enjoy asking an AI for art?

The fact of the matter is, capitalism has never been a good place for artists who want to follow their dream. If that’s something you want, then I’d suggest supporting the end of all work for money that automation provides. Then people can truly work on whatever they care about all day and not have to worry about feeding themselves.

Drewelite ,

How could this be?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •