Plague is a classic. Oldies but goodies.

Next pandemic?

So you guys fix measles yet?

I hope all this BS is just hiding content that can be restored easily when this dumbass is gone.

Thanks to those who archive it though.

Fair use is based on a four-factor analysis that considers the purpose of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount used, and the effect on the market for the original work.

It is ambiguous, and limited, tested on a case-by-case basis which makes this time in Copyright so interesting.

The first article has some good points taken very literally. I see how they arrive at some conclusions. They break it down step by step very well. Copyright is merky as hell, I’ll give them that, but the final generated product is what’s important in court.

The second paper, while well written, is more of a press piece. But they do touch on one important part relevant to this conversation:

The LCA principles also make the careful and critical distinction between input to train an LLM, and output—which could potentially be infringing if it is substantially similar to an original expressive work.

This is important because a prompt “create a picture of ____ in the style of _____” can absolutely generate output from specific sampled copyright material, which courts have required royalty payments in the past. An LLM can also sample a voice of a voice actor so accurately as to be confused with the real thing. There have been Union strikes over this.

All in all, this is new territory, part of the fun of evolving laws. If you remove the generative part of AI, would that be enough?

Enlighten me. I hope I read it wrong.

It sounds like the EFF is advocating stripping/ignoring copyright information (as is currently done) when generating LLM’s to ease burden of small startups tracking down copyright owners. Something I had to do in productions and yeah, it sucked, but it’s how it works. (Radio is a tad different)

Wow, EFF. You’ve been a beacon of light in countless fights, but I did a doubletake on this article. Are you really implying that simply being on the internet is subject to business free-for-all?

I had to have read that wrong. It is absolutely the responsibility of any creative business to track and audit all copyrighted works used in deliverables.

AI, being the business of scooping up massive amounts of data, should absolutely have some sort of metadata log referencing copyrighted works. This is not the burden of small business, but standard practice for AI.

*AI is like reading and should be fair use

No, it certainly is not. Creating a compressed efficient database for search engines to reference and point users is fair use. Using that database to generate new work is not. AI is inherently generative.

Heck yeah! Old desktops or laptops are how most of us got started.

Things to consider:

• Power- this will be on 24/7 probably. That adds up
• Speed- not just CPU, but RAM, disk access and network interface can limit how much data you want to move.
• Noise- fans can suck (pun intended). Laptops tend to run quieter

I’m sort of looking to upgrade and N100 or N150’s are looking good. Jellyfin can do transcoding so that takes a little grunt. This box would work well for me. It’s not a storage solution, but can run docker and a handful of services.

Sorry bud, I understand your position. I miss the old reddit too but less so what it has morphed into the past couple years. Lemmy is young, and yeah, some folks here walk/cross some lines I wouldn’t. There is a bit of a bot problem creeping in but lemmy is t big enough for that to be a serious problem yet.

But then again you’re exactly the user we need. My presence here is what I want lemmy to be and yeah, I’ve locked horns with some folks on some discussions. In the end it’s us users who make lemmy what it is.

Too much work. Just rotate that arm down about 40° at this point.

/s of course, but it stung to type

Nothing personal, but ain’t nobody got time for Delta Quadrant Pizza delivery. That’s coming out of your tip, Kathryn.

I’ve also been daydreaming along these lines. I have an old Porsche that doesn’t run I’ve sort of wanted to electrify. There are a few kits out there, but pricy. If I get a cheap-as-shit Tesla, could I break it down and retrofit? Weight and suspension would be a problem. Plus I’ve heard they are a complete arse about proprietary computer stuff.

That or a Mazda 13b could be fun, but I’d have to gear it down somehow.

What’s that phrase Trumpy Dumpty liked so much? Witch hunt? Yeah, that’s it.

This is a witch hunt.

Yeah, you were projecting again orange orangutan.

The lot serves as a temporary storage space for Teslas arriving from overseas before they are sent to dealerships.

Hang on a second, this lot of cybertrucks came in from overseas? Aren’t they made in the USA?

Hmmm maybe they were just stored there because they weren’t selling.

Bingo. I was being more general in my response, but that is the more technical way of putting it.

First off, I’m by far no lawyer, but it was covered in a couple classes.

According to law as I know it, question 1 yes if there is no encryption, and question 2 no.

In reality, if you keep it for personal use, artists don’t care. A library however, isn’t personal use and they have to jump through more hoops than a circus especially when it comes to digital media.

But you raise a great point! I’d love to see a law library train AI for in-house use and test the system!

By gatekeeping I mean the use of digital methods to verify or restrict use of purchased copyright material after a sale such as Digital rights management, encryption such as CSS/AACS/HDCP, or obfuscation.

The whole “you didn’t buy a copy, you bought a license” BS undermines what copyright was supposed to be IMO.

So… A reservation deposit and matching ID at the door would fix all this?

Seems like a simple fix.

Copyright has not, was not intended to, and does not currently, pay artists.

You are correct, copyright is ownership, not income. I own the copyright for all my work (but not work for hire) and what I do with it is my discretion.

What is income, is the content I sell for the price acceptable to the buyer. Copyright (as originally conceived) is my protection so someone doesn’t take my work and use it to undermine my skillset. One of the reasons why penalties for copyright infringement don’t need actual damages and why Facebook (and other AI companies) are starting to sweat bullets and hire lawyers.

That said, as a creative who relied on artistic income and pays other creatives appropriately, modern copyright law is far, far overreaching and in need of major overhaul. Gatekeeping was never the intent of early copyright and can fuck right off; if I paid for it, they don’t get to say no.

That’s a good litmus test. If asking/paying artists to train your AI destroys your business model, maybe you’re the arsehole. ;)