The tool's creators are seeking to make it so that AI model developers must pay artists to train on data from them that is uncorrupted.
  • happybadger [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    I wonder how one would work for LLMs that are also being trained off intellectual property. Flooding it with nonsensical references maybe?

    • JackGreenEarth@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      10 months ago

      Why do Lemmy users suddenly care about copyright and intellectual property when it’s bad for AI? What do you have against AI? It’s a really useful tool that democratises creativity.

      • happybadger [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        I don’t give a shit about IP. My computer has three hard drives full of pirated material and it’s only because I don’t need a fourth yet. However, I obviously oppose AI because that “dEmOcRaTiSaTiOn Of CrEaTiViTy” is an assault on creative labour in the same way the powered loom was on artisanal. If you aren’t standing up for yourself as a worker you’re a fucking dog who’s distracted by the toys you’re given by your betters.

        edit: But to clarify approaching it from the standpoint of IP is just the most useful weapon against it. There’s the broadest base of support for the broadest level of regulation short of outright banning AI models, and I’m also for that.