this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
369 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37719 readers
321 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
369
Google says AI systems should be able to mine publishers’ work unless companies opt out, turning copyright law on its head (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 year ago by 0x815@feddit.de to c/technology@beehaw.org
177 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In its submission to the Australian government’s review of the regulatory framework around AI, Google said that copyright law should be altered to allow for generative AI systems to scrape the internet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's wrong on so many levels:

  1. Go check the Gutenberg Project and the patent registry, come back when you've learned them all, they're 100% free for everyone.
  2. Fleshbags have to pay for "dumbed down" educational material just to have a chance at learning anything during their lifespan, AIs don't.
  3. The lion's share of "paying for education" isn't even paid for education, but for certification. AIs would have to pay the same... if any were dumb enough to spend "several years worth of salary" on some diploma.
  4. The only part worth paying for, is "hands on experience", which right now is far more expensive for AIs (need simulations and robots built).
  5. Training AIs already isn't free, they need thousands to millions of repetitions to learn the stuff, which means quite a buck in server costs.

So just because fleshbags are really bad at learning, does not mean Google's AI has to pay for the same shortcomings, they already pay for their own.