this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
1345 points (100.0% liked)

196

16224 readers
3935 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
1345
AI rule (media.infosec.exchange)
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 20 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If the large corporations can use IP to crush artists, artists might as well try to milk every cent they can from their labor. I dislike IP laws as well, and you can never use the masters' tools to dismantle their house, but you can sure as shit do damage and get money for yourself.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Luckily, AI aren't the master's tools, they're a public technology. That's why they're already trying their had at regulatory capture. Just like they're trying to destroy encryption. Support open source development, It's our only chance. Their AI will never work for us. John Carmack put it best.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

AI algorithms aren't the masters tools in the sense that anyone can set up a model using free code on cheap tech, but they do require money to improve and produce quality products. The training data requires labor of artists to produce, the computers the model runs on require labor to make, and the electricity that allows the model to continuously improve requires, you guessed it, labor. Labor will always, and should always, be expensive, making AI most useful to those with money to spend.

IP is only one tool in the masters' tool box, but capitalism is their box, and the other forms of capital can be used to swing the public's tools far harder than a wage laborer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Hence why it's important that open source models should keep the support of the public. If they have to close shop, what remains will be those made by tech giants. They will be censored, they will be neutered, except if you pay enough for them. The power should remain with the artists, and not those with the money.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

They have the plant, but we have the power

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.