R
The truth is that copyright and licenses cannot be used to avoid abuses per se. They need to be defended in court
And when creators try to do that, we're told that the law can't be enforced because it would destroy the AI industry.
They had the money to buy ebooks for training, but they chose to pirate the books instead. Then, having been caught in a clear case of copyright infringement, they're trying to avoid any consequences.
@gisgeek @sjn I'm very aware of the Anthropic case, I'm a part of it.
Part of their defence has been that if they have to pay damages for everything they pirated, they'd go out of business. And now governments are talking about adding AI exceptions to copyright laws.
Telling people to not share things so they don't get stolen is not a solution. It's simple victim blaming.
licenses and copyright exist for that.
Yes, they do. One of my big frustrations with LLMs is that AI companies violated licenses and copyrights on a vast scale.
Yet, when creators seek recompense for that, we're told that can't be allowed to happen because it would destroy the AI industry.
@neil similarly, lots of people I used to talk to on Twitter about #SecondWorldWar history moved to BlueSky.
I miss that chat sometimes 🫤
@jwildeboer @tramtrist a lot of the spam I get these days is from GMail addresses.
@homelab @jwildeboer I have questions, if you don't mind.
