‘Impossible’ to create AI tools like ChatGPT without copyrighted material, OpenAI says::Pressure grows on artificial intelligence firms over the content used to train their products

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t think it is. We have all these non-human stuff we are awarding more rights to than we have. You can’t put a corporation in jail but you can put me in jail. I don’t have freedom from religion but a corporation does.

    • BURN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Corporations are not people, and should not be treated as such.

      If a company does something illegal, the penalty should be spread to the board. It’d make them think twice about breaking the law.

      We should not be awarding human rights to non-human, non-sentient creations. LLMs and any kind of Generative AI are not human and should not in any case be treated as such.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Corporations are not people, and should not be treated as such.

        Understand. Please tell Disney that they no longer own Mickey Mouse.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Again, I literally already said that it’s a problem.

          IP law is also different than granting rights to corporations. Corporations SHOULD be allowed to own IP, provided they’ve compensated the creator.

            • BURN@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Honestly, yes. I’m ok with that. People are not entitled to be able to do anything they want with someone else’s IP. 90 years is almost reasonable. Cut it in half and I’d also consider it fairly reasonable.

              I’m all for expanding copyright for individuals and small companies (small media companies, photographers who are incorporated, artists who make money based on commissions, etc) and reducing it for mega corps, but there’s an extremely fine line around that.

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                10 months ago

                Well I am not. If the goal is to promote artistic creation it should not follow inheritance. Heck it shouldn’t even be 45 years. No one at Disney was alive when Mickey was made therefore it should be public domain.

                Once you fix that let me know.