Replying to @⁨lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world⁩

There’s nothing wrong with using AI

Well, that is debatable. For some its using Ai is a problem by definition, its not even about the result. A few issues: a) Ai is unethically trained on data without respecting the original license, b) using Ai (probably even paying for it) supports Ai companies, which in turn are causing the massive issues in the tech price increases.

Replying to @⁨lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world⁩

You’re problem with AI isn’t with the technology itself nor its use.

I’m not sure about the weed argument, can’t say anything about it. But first, my personal problem with Ai doesn’t matter to this disussion, as I was talking about what people could have an issue with, not about my personal problems. Secondly farming data without respecting the original license, not even linking to the source where it got from is in fact a problem with “its use”. That is an unsolved problem lot of people just ignore, which does not make it less of a problem (it makes it a bigger problem). And that is just a few issues I listed, not even talking about the problems of generated content. There are legitimate concerns using Ai, no matter how you frame it, some just choose to ignore it.

Replying to @⁨thingsiplay@lemmy.ml⁩

But first, my personal problem with Ai doesn’t matter to this disussion, as I was talking about what people could have an issue with, not about my personal problems.

Okay. Then the problem that people, not you particularly, have with AI isn’t with the technology itself nor its use, but the methods by which the companies “grow and harvest it”, so to speak.

Which I don’t even think is true. People have just lost their minds over this. If a company unethically steals data and publishes a book with that data, we don’t say that there are legitimate concerns using books.

Replying to @⁨lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world⁩

If a company unethically steals data and publishes a book with that data, we don’t say that there are legitimate concerns using books.

Off course we say its a legitimate concern if someone unethically steals data and publishes a book with that data… The point of scraping and stealing data without respecting its license, training their software with it and using it commercially (or even non commercially) without giving even credit and not respecting its original license?

the problem that people … have with AI isn’t with the technology itself nor its use, but the methods by which the companies “grow and harvest it”, so to speak.

No, its not just the methods. I am talking about deep problems with the technology, the methods how companies go with it, and then its usage from company and end user. Ai trained with those data and used makes it impossible to respect the original license, for the user. So in this case, the company using the Ai AND the user of the model violate licenses. Maybe. Maybe not, if the data allows it. But we don’t know and CANNOT check and know for sure, that’s the problem. Just because you don’t understand the issue or don’t care does not make it less of a problem.

As an example with software licenses like GPL requires that any derivative works using this source code (such as Linux or whatever my personal program is licensed under GPL) has to be GPL licenses (Open Source) too. That is not debatable. That is how this license work. Now the Ai can be trained on this data, using the source code, and then? See where this goes? That is only one generalized example.

Replying to @⁨lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world⁩

The difference is, you know which book you have a concern with. Ai does not operate like that. With using Ai, you don’t know which book the data is from and it is not possible for the Ai to tell you that. There are conceptional problems with Ai. Your book example does not work here, because that works differently than Ai.

en