https://youtu.be/mAUpxN-EIgU?si=XmNvNOGck_ncDEnI&t=264>Um I'm a woman so I'm not here to answer tech related questions even though I'm a CTO>Um we might've used scraped Youtube videos to train SoraHow hard is AI gonna flop in the upcoming year? This woman certainly knows nothing about their products but is the CTO lol. Clownworld is getting unreal.
Why would she answer it even if she knew? These are trade secrets.
>>101220542Because it's not a trade secret.Using data without permission to train AIs will be illegal soon lol.
gross bogged creature
>>101220352She's hot, would invest.
sex with gross bogged creature
>>101220750>Using data without permission to train AIs will be illegal soon lol.Not gonna happen. China doesn't care about Americans laws and they will make better AI models using our data. if anything american government will make it easier to use copyrighted materials.
>woman>cto
>>101220750>Using data without permissionIt's literally from common crawl. You can download it too. Free speech here retard, information is not copyright. Processing it with any kind of algorithm does not involve copyright. Likeness is not copyright. Copyright is exact reproduction for sale, whether a paintball gun did it or a neural network.
>>101222298Okay so if I processed a book by an algorithm that changes a title and converts it to another format it's not subject to copyright? If I copy a part of the book exactly I can't use it without saying who is the author?
>>1012221582 more weeks
>>1012224192 more years, 2 more trillions of $ of research, 20 more trillions od $ of ((cloud)) datacenter resources to discover an actual usecase
>>101222446what is your usecase?
>>101220750Getting heavy AI derangement syndrome vibes from this poster
>>101222479>Self sufficient>I roast ((Open))AI and their pedo rapist jew CEO and albanian roastie CTO>Send memes on /g/ and /pol/>Overall a net positive for the world when compared to other people like jeets, niggers, women etc.>>101222507But it's true, if you can spit out someone else's content by ((AI)) with a private algorithm why couldn't I scrape the Internet and then spit out unmodified or slightly modified data in the same way with my heckin private ((AI)).Technically speaking - is a search engine/autocomplete tool allowed to search information which no one gave it explicit permission to search? Can generative AI use your pictures to make generated pictures/voice/videos? If it's allowed then why did the GPT-4o voice, which was a copy of Scarlett Johansson's voice, got removed by ((OpenAI))?
>>101220352Yeah women in tech are useless. Your point?
>>101222794wet hole
>>101222384 Are you implying it spits out carbon copies of the training data? Just technology is specifically trained and created to NOT do that
>>101220352
>>101223711>copyright theft is LE OKAY because i'm just extracting features from the data!
>>101223765It's only "theft" or copyright infringement if you repost the exact same content and they claim it's yours. AI (that isn't horrifically overfitted) is specifically trained to do that
>>101220352Don't be disingenuous.Sora was definitely trained on Youtube videos, and Murati definitely knows that.The legal issues surrounding use of content for training are already serious and could conceivably be existential to companies that rely on it. Nobody is going to admit to exactly what was or wasn't used until they've run their response past a team of lawyers.
>>101220352training data was FREE REAL ESTATE and now that ai bubble is a thing, all the kikes want a piece it's just money, everyone wants a taste
>>101220352They obviously used stock footage. Youtube is full of sô yboys "rants", tutorials, and reviews, not of which is supposed to be in a good dataset.And yeah have you guys never worked in high industry? Women suck their way to the top and know nothing.
>>101223791It's whatever the supreme court says it is. The web is not public domain, training involves copying.
It is coming off as surprising how the crowd that visits /g/ is mostly luddites and anti-future folk.
>>101220542> scraping the internet is a trade secretmind numbingly retarded>>101225417many anons noticed from the start how same rejects that failed at bitcoin speculation are now magically ai experts, hoping and prayting it will be something they can make money out of. funnily enough they're too retarded to see how only globohomo corporations are making the profits while they shill for free.
>>101226520>become coders>end up t@ans>become anti-aimany such cases
>>101226520>>101226743Transgenders are pro-ai.Being critical of technology, is not being a luddite. A luddite is against technological progress."anti-future folk", is such a weird way to phrase this.Using the word "folk" either makes you some cowboy in a flyover state, or some pro-lgbtq woke person.They have their one reasons for using the word "folk".In any case, ur both faggots.
>>101226816>>101226743>NU-UH you are the trannys lmao
training on youtube is going to fucking sink them, this is literally corporate theft on a gigantic scale, the courts will massacre them
>>101220750Okay imma go now onto twitter and pixiv and report all and any artists I see for copyright infringement, after all they learned their "trade" by observing drawings done by other people
>>101226939>MS vs Googlenice, let them eat each other
>>101226927>no bro i am not a troon>posts coomer tranime every time.>>101226816you will never be a woman
>>101226816retard take a look at any social mediafind a post that screeches about how AI is killing the artists or something, and then check the posting account. there's like a 60% chance the account will have a rainbow or transgender flag somewhere in itit's also further proved by statistics regarding identity and sexuality within artistic communities, last I checked artistic communities had 4-5 times higher amount of trannies per capita than general USA population
>>101222007low standards niggers like you are why 3/10s get to act entitled
>>101226520Only surprising to tech enthusiasts who don't actually understand anything about tech
>>101227022try again, Moisheno tr00ns in glorious CCP
>>101227009It's not MS vs GoogleGoogle owns the platform but the content people upload on it is NOT GOOGLE'S to do anything they like with it. They especially can't let Microshit train their models on it so they can both profit in the untold billions. This is literally the kind of case IP laws were supposed to prevent and its the average Joe getting ripped off right now, while the normies are being mesmerized with all these smoke and mirrors about singularity and AGI. If the lawyers don't rip them to shreds for it we live in a compromised state run by corporations.
>>101227034>>101227022>>101226816the new leftist position is anti-aithey hate it cause it sucks up electricity for less efficient google search and deep fake porn, MUH CARBONthey hate it because all their hipster artfag friends, the coffee joint barista musicians are afraid of losing their gigs
>>101227107OpenAi is MS's bitch, SAMA already sold them out, as mush as Youtube and Google are one entity under the same kikes.
>>101227113and that's why I report all "artists" I see on twitter along with their income sources like patreon, there's always a very high chance it's a transgender
>>101226743>>end up t@anstatans? What?
>>101226816>Transgenders are pro-ai.Irrelevant, that says nothing about the tech itself. You're Russian btw.
>>101227090Plenty of girlboys in china, cheap, too. You have one of the gayest countries in the world right there because of your physical features.Who are you trying to fool, wumao? Do you want your grorious dictatorship to win advocates through easily disprovable lies?
>>101222298Copyright means you literally cannot copy someones work/files without permission.You can't download a movie. You can't download my blog post. You can't download my video. it is not legal for you to make a copy of it.The scraped web material is already mostly illegal. Of course, re-distributing it is worse than just saving it on your own machine.
>>101222158they'll make it acceptable to scrape the millions of small websites that exist, and user data from apps, sites, etc. but it will be very illegal to train on copyright material held by large, aggressive corporations, like music publishers.I'm actually kind of looking forward to finding out just how hypocritical the new legislation will be.
>>101222273yeah she pegs sam on the regular I'm sure.
>>101227492came here to post this
>>101227451>You can't download a movie. You can't download my blog post. You can't download my video. it is not legal for you to make a copy of it.You are doing that by just opening the webpage. To display the content on your PC, it has to first be copied from server and downloaded onto your hard drive. If that was really true, it wouldn't be legal to visit pretty much any website.
>>101227405I can confirm, unfortunately. Due to smaller pool of females and high standards, increasingly more men are trooning out in China.
>>101227543But you're not distributing it as YOUR content via a paid service (ChatGPT/Copilot etc). This is the problem. Are you retarded to ask such a question?
>>101227814But it's not their content? What you are distributing is outputs of a neural network, that are never copies of training data.
>>101227686>>101227405chinks are the only ones who should be allowed troon out, 99% of whites doing it just look disgusting, repulsive and vile
>>101227970You have down syndrome or have 0 clue how LLM chatbots and similar algorithms work. They TRAIN themselves using data and memorize it. You think ChatGPT actually knows the meaning behind the shit it spurts out? If it did there wouldn't be any hallucinations. If you output someone's data/book quote/code without caring for license, your ((AI)) is just a plagiarism machine.
>>101228056I know very well how LLMs or diffusion models work and what data they use, but what actually matters is what they output. And the outputs don't violate any copyright, since they don't match any existing copyrighed data.>If you output someone's data/book quote/code without caring for licenseBut this doesn't happen unless the model was overfit by some pajeet, otherwise you will never get a beyond a reasonable doubt copy of training data. That's just the outputs but the model weights aren't a violation of copyright either, since none of training data can be extracted from them
>>101228096The algorithm output is actually a combined plagiarism from all of the training data. Look at it this way. Real AI doesn't need training data. Real AI hasn't been invented yet, this is just machine learning packed by marketing for selling purposes (why they had to come up with the AGI term).
>>101220750You didn't make that Data.
>>101228242Who cares about "real AI"? The current "AI" we have is good enough for what it's supposed to do.>The algorithm output is actually a combined plagiarism from all of the training data.1. By the same logic if you were an artist, anything you draw is to be considered plagiarism as your "training data" is paintings and designs that you've seen in the past, all copyrighted2. Copyright laws only apply to creations, not learning methods, which is why it's legal for you to study another artist, and as long as you don't copy their images 1:1 it's fine. Same for machine learning algorithms, it doesn't matter what it takes in, as long as the outputs aren't copies of the copyrighted input. By the copyright law definitions it isn't considered plagiarism.
>>101228056That just means current AI is qualified to be president of Harvard
>>101220352Mira Murati rapes me while I sleep
>>101220750It's illegal right now actually.
