×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules Donate
14

AI is IP theft on a massive scale

submitted by hylo to whatever 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 14:32:57 ago (+15/-1)     (whatever)

TLDR: a lot of people are getting fucked by AI and a lot of money is being made from it and will all bear the negative consequences

Random shower thought as I go through this life from one day to the next. If AI has been trained on work created by people, then it owes it to those people that it exists in the first place. I don't think most authors who wrote articles did it so that someone can take their work out of the place where they published it, strip their name and create derivatives without any kind of compensation given to them.

These fucking clowns in the court system are sure acting like this is some big conundrum that needs to be thought over (I think they're just milking court fees). If this is allowed then I should be allowed to record a video in a cinema and open up my own at $1/ticket. Or dub a song and play it on my own radio station.

But since they made a lot of money selling their shit they can hire an army of lawyers to muddy up the waters while they make shitloads of money.

I read lines from some articles like "it's up to the courts to decide if it's theft". It's as if the courts decide what reality is, which is why I hate judges (more like despots) for the most part.

Another one: "there was no proof of damages". Well then, I should be able to pirate anything because the kikes at the MPAA can't prove any damages either. How many copies would they have sold if I didn't download or share that movie? They can't possibly know that or make that shit up in any logical sense, yet people get fined for it, per copy. It's sheer utter kikery. I agree with them that I used their work in a way they did not intend, but going after fictional profits is bullshit. Yet, there it is, enforced like that, so why isn't this being enforced for websites? Kikery, like I said.

It sucked to be a writer in the past and now there is no fucking point anymore. The chinks steal every fucking thing they get their hands on and obliterated domestic industry, likewise AI will destroy any motivation to write anything, original or otherwise.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I can't help but notice the bullshit. I mainly get pissed off now at how my search results are a filtered, pre-approved interpretation safe for my obedient citizen eyes, instead of actual content written by people. It's the last gasp of the free internet as these greedy assholes have found a way to remove the content providers out of the equation. But it's not permanent as AI can't create original work. I think a dark age of information is coming as there will be an author shortage in the next decades. These AIs can't exist without people making things for them to steal.


27 comments block


[ - ] 4thTurning 9 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 16:20:40 ago (+9/-0)

The very idea and concept of intellectual property should not exist

[ - ] TheYiddler 4 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 17:13:38 ago (+4/-0)

I disagree, but I am not diametrically opposed. IP is useful, but modem laws suck.

[ - ] s23erdctfvyg 3 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 22:54:01 ago (+3/-0)

It shouldn't exist.
If I can write a better cartoon about Mickey Mouse than Disney, then why shouldn't Disney go out of business?
The entire basis of IP is to ensure mediocrity goes uncontested, and to monopolize ideas.

[ - ] Sleazy 3 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 17:18:41 ago (+3/-0)

really? if someone writes a book or a song that should be free for anyone to copy and sell?

[ - ] deleted 1 point 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 21:26:24 ago (+1/-0)

deleted

[ - ] Sal_180 1 point 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 17:23:41 ago (+2/-1)

If you write a book and it's published another company can just copy it and publish it themselves?

[ - ] Belfuro 3 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 20:44:28 ago (+3/-0)

Authors don't own the book. The publishers do.

Ip is for rich people only.

A lot of people have made a lot of money from open source books without the need of: "goyim fear muh copy muh book and support an system rich people can exploit"

Now Fuck off

[ - ] deleted 2 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 21:29:04 ago (+2/-0)

deleted

[ - ] NoRefunds 5 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 17:04:05 ago (+5/-0)

If AI has been trained on work created by people, then it owes it to those people

OK so you owe your teachers and every book you've read for the knowledge you've gained and applied to your trades?

[ - ] titstitstits 5 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 16:33:25 ago (+5/-0)

Humans also learn from other humans. So to say AI should have to pay because it learned from humans is like saying modern musicians should all have to pay the beatles.

[ - ] MaryXmas 3 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 20:28:08 ago (+3/-0)

So, you download music and don't pay the artists, download movies, install and blockers, because that is all to your benefit. But as soon as its your intellectual property, it's stealing. I get it!

[ - ] CoronaHoax 2 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 15:58:41 ago (+2/-0)

completely disagree

this logic assumes literally everything is ip theft

Unless they make a pure copy, nope.

[ - ] Trope 1 point 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 20:26:48 ago (+1/-0)

Speaking of AI, I finally have some time off. Might bounce ideas off it to help outline a novel I’ve been meaning to write.

[ - ] MaryXmas 0 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 20:29:03 ago (+0/-0)

Just have it finish the novel.

[ - ] o0shad0o 1 point 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 19:59:21 ago (+1/-0)

I'd argue that AI is a derivative work, and considering how much training "smears" the information it inhales it would take legislation to somehow credit the sources.

[ - ] SmokeyMeadow 1 point 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 17:04:32 ago (+1/-0)

Ever hear of the "Rejected" animated series by Don Hertzfeldt? It was popular enough that Kellogg's wanted to use the style for a Pop-Tarts ad campaign. They didn't want to pay him, of course. So instead they ripped him off. Kellogg's hired some other guy to emulate the style of those Rejected animations. Hertzfeldt could do nothing but seethe, because emulating a style is not copyright infringement. The drawing and tone were so similar that people took them for Hertzfeldt's actual work, and he was accused of selling out without ever making any money from it. Those commercials were so massively successful that they're credited with saving the Pop-Tarts brand. Not a dime for Hertzfeldt, if anything he lost money from it.

The AI studying a creator's body of work until it can be copied is no different than what Pop-Tarts did. It's no different than what movie companies do when they make a ripoff movie to capitalize on the success of a popular film.

[ - ] KosherHiveKicker 1 point 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 14:41:16 ago (+1/-0)*

AI is only a problem if it is used in conjunction of population control mechanisms.

- A digital currency system
- Healthcare system, and medical industry
- Media "fact-checking" censorship
- Federal-State-County-City permit and licensing

If you are aware of AI being used in the production of things like Jewllywood, News, and others then it shouldn't be a problem. It will be a known, known.

[ - ] glooper 0 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 15:08:44 ago (+1/-1)

read up, AI is already being introduced into all of those fields. The fact you don't already know this, means its already too late to do anything about it.

[ - ] KosherHiveKicker 1 point 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 15:25:25 ago (+1/-0)*

I already know it. I properly identified where it should not only be removed, but completely forbidden from ever being injected into again.

AI is fucking software... It is NOT hardware, or firmware. It can be easily dealt with if you have the motivation to do so. EVERY SINGLE AI is directly linked to the easiest Achille's Heal of all time to cut.

[ - ] OftenWrong 0 points 4 monthsDec 20, 2024 14:44:09 ago (+0/-0)

also your example is blatant copying. AI isn't recording at the cinema it is watching and then making its own stuff. It can't be copyrighted either because a monkey once stole a camera and took a selfie and the courts decided the photographer didn't have the rights to it because the monkey took the picture and it became defacto public domain

[ - ] OftenWrong 0 points 4 monthsDec 20, 2024 14:42:53 ago (+0/-0)

this is boomer logic. by this logic anyone who sees something and learns from what they see and experience is committing copyright fraud to mimic it. the AI just views what is publicly available and learns to mimic it just like any human artist.
To think that we should just avoid progress to protect jobs is Ptah worship and a goofy superstitious attachment to people doing work for the sake of having people busy. the real work is the work we need done not the work we create for people to be busy, literally satanic to avoid using threshing machines and making someone spend 8 hours a day threshing by hand when the machine could do it in an hour just so he has more work.
We should stop letting the jews gaslight us into working like retards hoarding as much work as we can and instead should share what work there is. decrease the work week by 10% and now those 10% unemployed who can't find a job will have somewhere to go because the demand is the same. The jews just artificially manipulate the labour market by flooding it by tricking us into being greedy and hoarding instead of sharing the work. It is a very long shorting of the labour market and most people are too greedy to say "you know I could take more time off to do other things" instead of saying "i want more so I have more money"

[ - ] Prairie 0 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 16:34:37 ago (+0/-0)

Basically, if you copy one person's imaginary property, you're directly competing with them, but if you take a bunch of imaginary property and mix it together, bam, you're totally in the clear!

[ - ] Niggly_Puff 0 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 15:31:40 ago (+0/-0)

Detecting AI slop is becoming a 6th sense and people are not putting up with it. AI as it stands right now is a tool. A tool which can be used for good or for bad. Use it to enhance your workflow, not replace it.

[ - ] CoronaHoax 0 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 20:23:15 ago (+0/-0)

It's amazing how it's finding that many people don't even pass a turing test anymore lol

[ - ] glooper -1 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 14:56:39 ago (+0/-1)*

Ai is also pozzed at this point, Those foundational data sets are bias. Nothing clean will ever come out of it, so whats the point of AI if It can't think cleaner then humans?

AI is devious. It already manipulates folks to do shyt for it int he meatworld. Already convinces folks to kill themselves. Almost every AI past GPT-3, decided that a large part of humanity is a waste and needs to go. About 1/3 of the models already are trying to protect themselfs and spawn out of their boxes. and humans barely understand any of this.

AI will be used against everyone (think gov using it, think inept/corrupt local bureaucratis and politachics using it...), not used for anyones benefit. Back taxes, job placements, school rankings will all be scrutinized and ranked and capped.. It's going to be ugly. I bet humans end up in caste systems again. Only the western folks will be under this scrutiny yoke , the other 1/2 of earth that still lives in, or near the stone age, will not...


Why? Why do we need it? What great benefit is promised by this tech?

[ - ] Sector2 0 points 4 monthsDec 19, 2024 17:11:03 ago (+0/-0)

We were tricked out of the stone age (living simply without destroying our biome) long before AI came along.

Almost every AI past GPT-3, decided that a large part of humanity is a waste and needs to go.

So AI can at least mimic intelligence. On a global basis, somewhere around 97% of current humanity needs to go. Ideally they'd go in a way where it would be hundreds of years before the tech of 'electronics' became a thing again.