• OrteilGenou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    14 minutes ago

    Once you understand that AI is limited to the questioner’s ability to properly elucidate what they need to know you’ll have several more botched concrete stair resurfacings.

    Thanks Gemini, you self-contradicting potato

  • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    20 years? More like somewhere between 30 to 40 if we count early WWW and the Gopher+Usenet that came before it. The GPL isn’t quite that old, but the spirit behind it sure is. If we count early home-computer clubs back in the 70’s (like the one that birthed the original Apple) or the ham-radio crowd that came before it, we can push into 50+ year territory, easy.

    I hadn’t considered AI being a paywall around the whole WWW but now that you mention it, it kind of looks that way. I’ve opined elsewhere that social media companies (e.g. Facebook) are building walled-gardens to keep eyeballs and attention-spans locked on their brand of reality. This would just be another avenue of attack in that strategy.

    • Underwaterbob@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      48 minutes ago

      I remember frequenting MOOs and IRC, and downloading guitar tabs and chords off OLGA using clients in DOS back in the early 90s. Over 30 years ago. The Internet today is unrecognizable by comparison.

  • francois@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    This is not new for companies to make money on the internet using the work and information others made without compensation for the community
    Google search or stackoverfow did it long before LLMs, it’s just that the price is different, you pay with your attention spans instead of money
    I’m pretty sure that we’ll have freely accessible LLMs with ads baked in a way you can’t even see them at first glance (if they aren’t doing it already)

    What’s new with LLMs is that the information source is hidden, no credit is attributed for people that contribute to the community anymore

    • sfgifz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Google search or stackoverfow did it long before LLMs

      These examples had very obvious attribution and were an easy path to you. AI on the other hand serves as the source of truth in almost all scenarios. I consider myself a savvy user and even then I find myself never actually clicking on the cited sites - just looking at their titles, most people don’t even bother with that.

  • Jiral@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Welcome to the world of scientific publishing, long before AI. Except authors even have to pay for creating “content”, and reviewers are expected to work for free. Yet article access is sold at astronomical prices.

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    which is why any opensource project should have strict restrictions about how companies are allowed to use it.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Just further enshittification. Companies don’t make new things or new technologies anymore. They just find new ways to rent squat and extract fees. They’ve stolen everyone’s work, manufactured a way to give it to you first without you seeing the author’s material, and told everyone to use this method to access information so they can charge for it.

  • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    There is a license that says that all derivatives must also be open source.

    But also AI companies don’t care about the law, they stole all their data, engage in insider trading, circular trading, and generating all manner of illegal content, they don’t give a fuck. And the US government isn’t doing anything to hold them accountable, infact the president is getting in on it.

    • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      they stole all there data

      Obviously fuck the capitalists and AI scammers. But reading and learning from a library, then writing and selling your own book based on that is NOT stealing. It’s the wrong argument.

      The answer obviously is to keep the actual source material and libraries and book archives open and just run open source AI models at home. You can run smaller versions on a solar powered PC no problem.

      The issue with trying to make “AI is just stolen” happen is that it will make open source AI models illegal. AI companies would love that because they can afford to license and pay or work around or obscure or whatever. The “intellectual property” argument is always a disgusting capitalist one. Knowledge is either free or nothing is.

      • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Library implies consent that was not there and access to the public that was not there.

      • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Except these people are turning around and burningdown the libraries once they’ve read all the books.

      • UpperBroccoli@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        But reading and learning from a library, then writing and selling your own book based on that is NOT stealing.

        It could be argued that these AIs are not actually learning but collecting and rearranging. That’s still stealing in my book, especially if it happens on a massive industrial scale and by a megacorp instead of a person.

    • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      And the US government is doing anything to hold them accountable

      You probably meant “nothing” instead of “anything”?

      Yes, all this is very much the product of the current US admin.

  • Wilco@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    11 hours ago

    That is how capitalism works.

    The American Weather Service provided weather updates for free, but a company came along and just started copying what the weather service posted … then sued the Weather Service for publicly posting the weather because the government is not allowed to provide a service for free that a company can charge for.

    Insanity.

    • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Same thing happened in Germany where the DWD collects and publishes weather data. Wetter.de came along and sued them, forcing them to hide features in their app (developed and paid for by tax money) behind a paywall. That was later overturned, but I still refuse to use their site

    • TheStaffmaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Government issues the business licenses. Seems like someone needs to be reminded who has who by the balls.

      • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 minute ago

        Yup. Government has businesses by the balls.

        But corruption exists.

        Therefore the goverment only ever really pulls small businesses and normal people by the balls, while the big businesses and uber rich (money heavyweights) get to pull the government by the tongue. Sometimes even the balls as well.

        Just as Supply Side Jesus intended.

      • Doomsider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        8 hours ago

        In case anyone didn’t know the answer is business as in business has the government by the balls.

  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Only 20 years? My techguyforum screen name is damn near 30 years old at this point. (Don’t go there. Site is ruined trash, now. ) I been giving info to help with shit since even before then. Internet has my fingerprints in it since the early 90’s.

  • HrabiaVulpes@europe.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    current wave of AI isn’t even new technology

    We had predictive text. We had neural networks. We had both for more than few decades. Someone just decides “what if predictive text was built on neural network?” and it worked much better than old solution. In fact old solution worked pretty much like one-layer neural network.

    TechBros literally took something we already had, made it more expensive and sold it to investors.

    • magz :3@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      ehh not exactly. the current wave within ai was started in 2017 with the google paper “attention is all you need”, which introduced the transformer architecture (the T in GPT). deep neural networks were still used for NLP before this, it was just LSTMs instead of transformers, which had various limitations

    • ferrule@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Sort of. Unless you go to a private university taxes go to the public schools to fun facilities and wages for the educators. While you may pay tuition, the overall cost of that education and the services needed for one to do research doesn’t come wholely out of your pocket.

      Now I agree you should be compensated more, as someone who tried to get published academically and has filed patents I can see why there is a split of compensation.

      • Deckname@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Wdym? Scientists usually don’t get paid to publish. The person you replied to, probably meant academic publishing as in:

        1. Scientist does research and compiles manuscript, usually via public money, even in shithole countries like the US
        2. Scientist submits manuscript to for profit journal
        3. Journal outsources proofreading to other scientists, who do it for free
        4. Manuscript is accepted or revised on scientists time and money
        5. Scientist pays for publishing
        6. For Profit journal either charges extra for “open” publication or charges scientist and other scientists for access, usually by agreements with the respective library
        7. Profit! (On the journals part)

        Where is the split of compensation? For patents there is, but for academic publishing usually not.

  • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    …Seriously?

    This guy has no leg to stand on; that’s the Mildly Infuriating part.


    EDIT: Am I the only one on Lemmy who discounts the whole post the moment I see a blue checkmark?

    Especially this one. It’s so hypocritical it hurts.

    • Brahvim@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Steal the idea. Paraphrase it and screenshot it as your own! Victorii /s

      …Also how capitalism works, according to another post here.

    • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Don’t discount the message though. After all we’re interacting with a screenshot of a tweet. It doesn’t make me a fan of this guy.

    • Famko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I think other people can buy the blue checkmark for you on twitter, though my information may be faulty.

      In any case, just cause he gave money to that ass wipe Elon doesn’t mean that his analogy isn’t valid, just a little “leopards ate my face” kinda deal.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Well, he tweets many times a day, many posts like this:

        …Seems like a “Tech Bro” type to me. He’s just engagement farming; I don’t care what he says, there nothing valid about that.

        In fact, I’d wager some of those posts are automated.

      • Donkter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I think twitter also might still give blue check marks to “important” people it’s just available for anyone to buy now

    • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      You either do it, or someone else will do it and start impersonating you. People with any kind of public/online presence sorta have to unfortunately.

  • corbindallas@fedinsfw.app
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    119
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I think this is the story of humanity. It ain’t getting better until we massacre the inhumanly rich, eat Thier families while the world watches, and force evil socialism on shared intellectual property

    Follow me for more bad advice

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      See, here’s the thing. Everybody loves to point at the guilitine, and the French Revolution. They love to say “Lets do what they did!”

      Here’s the problem. Nobody talks about what came next.

      Because what happened was, you had one group of rich assholes who controlled everything, and treated everybody else like shit. So the French chopped off their heads, and got rid of these rich assholes.

      And what happened next? Well, a lot of infighting, but the end result was instead of having a group of rich assholes controlling everyone, you instead had a different group of not rich assholes controlling everyone, who thengot rich from it. And nothing changed.

      I think, before we go around killing everyone, we need a plan. We need to figure out why humans are so quick to all clump up as one submissive blob, who follows the will of whoever claims to have power.

      Instead of 1 president, or 1 dictator, I think we should instead have a panel of 1 million people. Tens of thousands of people from every state. Anyone can apply, and if need be, your individual county can run sn election if you’re not running unopposed.

      This I think would cut down tremendously on corruption in our government. Because a company couldn’t just bribe 1 president. They’d need to bribe 1 million people.

      And the comittee would always represent the people, because they ARE the people. Most people would know at least 1 committee member in their neighborhood.

      THEN you can kill all the rich assholes.

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        We need to figure out why humans are so quick to all clump up as one submissive blob, who follows the will of whoever claims to have power.

        because people like when decisions are made for them, and they don’t have to think to make those decisions for themselves.

      • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        The French Revolution was succesful. What the king & nobles did before that was much, much worse.

        It just wasn’t a socialist revolution. The bourgeoisie won.

        It also didn’t happen just like that, it took 10 years - Wikipedia calls it “a period of political and societal change”. I think it’s fair to say it wasn’t completely unplanned.

      • Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Wealth cap or bust. No one should ever be able to make 1 billion. I think there should be forced divestments after 1 bil and you’re barred from the stock market for 5 years. Plus☝🏻, if you use any money to build anything whether it be a building or a business, said billionaire is not allowed to earn more than a total of 1 million/yr.

        • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          13 hours ago

          That sounds like a cat and mouse game. You make a rule that person A can’t be on the stock market for 5 years. This does two things. First, it causes rich people to find some loophole or exploit.

          And second, it just disincentivizes them from using the stock market at all, in favor of some unregulated form of making money. Like crypto.

          Now you could say “Well then we’ll place caps on how much you can trsnsfer crypto over to american currency”.

          And now you’re in a cat and mouse game. Because now they just need to convert it to some foreign currency. Then convert the foreign currency to American currency.

          See? Cat and mouse.

          See, this idea thread is putting up fences to seperate the corrupt from illicit gains. You build a fence, they bring a ladder. You build a bigger fence, they bring a bigger ladder. You build a wall, they install a window. The incentive is always there to overcome the barrier.

          Instead, we should be finding ways to make bringing a bigger ladder cost more than the gains. Rewrite the whole system so that all people benefit before the greedy have a chance to hoard it all.

          Regulate every system. Regulate every persons finances. If they cheat the system, make them pay twice the gains they got. Then distribute those fines to fund education and poor neighborhoods.

          Suddenly you don’t need to worry about how big their ladder is, because the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.

        • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          This only sounds good to people who are ignorant of both economics and history. Wealth caps, rent control, fixed prices, etc all sound nice until you take a minute to learn about the side effects. These sorts of policies aren’t knew, but they don’t work which is why they haven’t stuck around.

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          What do you mean by forced divestments?

          Oh and are you going to hard code these numbers into the law? Because rich people would respond by deflating the currency to the point where the average person makes 10 cents a day and a millionaire is inflation-equivalent to a billionaire today.

          Or they’ll split a 10 billion dollar company between 20 of their closest friends and family, 500 million each, to stay under the cap.

          Or a thousand other loopholes people will use. Take a company private and just declare it at worth only a million.

          • Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            forced divestments

            Selling off half their stocks or ¼ of their their majority share to lower their stake in their own businesses so their wealth is stifled.

      • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        There needs to be a little killing first, to set the tone. I like your ideas, but there is no way in this world or any other that the rich assholes would allow you to assemble a committee like that. They would literally carpet bomb it before allowing it.

      • Zephorah@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        13 hours ago

        The majority of people don’t like to lead. It’s simply easier and more comfortable to follow. Less conflict. Less confrontation. Less stress.

        Leading requires initiative, the capacity to be confrontational, to step outside the box. It’s rather opposite of what is known as the bandwagon effect. Most people cannot do any of that without feeling extremely self conscious or anxious. Or, without being obnoxious and off-putting. You not only have to be able to function separate, you have to do it without annoying the fuck out of those around you.

        Effective leadership also requires the capacity for some degree of speed. Some problems cannot wait for debate due to safety.

        The bandwagon effect is a fun bit of study. What’s even better is the majority of people believe it doesn’t hold sway over them when the data shows that it absolutely does, something like 70-80%. It’s why, in part, so much money is thrown at AI and bots on social media, especially pre elections.

        This appears to be a long but solid definition of it, with some easy bullet points: https://www.researchprospect.com/what-is-the-bandwagon-effect/

        There’s also a reverse bandwagon effect, for, you know, the cool people.