Slamming AI with Kinkery

[Husky_Embrace]

@yano2mch I'll try one more time. You say everything in the public domain is fair game? I would say it isn't. It is like the Honey extension controversy, but many times worse.

Say you're some niche tech related channel. You have a team and do full time research, staying up to date, deconstruct and experiment. You have a YT channel and a website. It is too niche to ak for paid subscriptions to either. With ads and sponsorships you can still earn good wages for you and your team.

Now an AI comes along. They scrape every bit of information from both your channel and website, and now act as the middle man. Anyone asking the AI will receive an answer based on your work, and you never get to see a cent of it. Sure they can click through to the source, but it'll only be a fraction of the original income. The business stagnates and soon everyone is out of a job, possibly with major debts as investments were needed.

Someone sold their work and they didn't get paid. It doesn't matter if it's in the public domain. They deserve to be rewarded for their work. The AI on the other hand does not. At best the AI deserves a sliver for getting the information to the one searching it, just like the search engines of old used to do. Instead they get practically everything.

That is stealing. Taking someone else's work without consent or knowledge and selling it.

The difference with fan fiction and the like is that they are most often harmless. They have little reach and even less likely to make money on it. And here's the kicker, fan fiction at times does get sued for making profit or damaging the brand.

I have stated that AI can be a great boon. Even this unethical and immoral version. But to disregard the big elephants in the room where AI is trained on data that doesn't belong to them, and then passes that on is simply an affront to the creators.

Music, video, the written word, nothing is safe any more. If I propose an idea or article on the internet, it can be poached and offered to an ever growing audience who are willing to pay the AI, but not me. That is a trend that is very dangerous and should be stopped. Anyone's effort should be valued, and not stolen and used for their own gain.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Kinda knotta a Story Idea 'Kay?

 

[000zing]

I have been experimenting with AI - (Google Gemini) - just as an experiment... and I can get it to write all sorts of stuff... yippie...

WHY?????

I suppose this is a classic case of someone who, having been told something is bad, still just has to 'experiment'.

That's how drugs dealers make their money - out of the feckless and moronic of this world....

Oh, right... 'yippee'...

 

[yano2mch]

@yano2mch I'll try one more time. You say everything in the public domain is fair game? I would say it isn't. It is like the Honey extension controversy, but many times worse.

If i have access to something, why does that discount a non-human from having access to it?

Now an AI comes along. They scrape every bit of information from both your channel and website, and now act as the middle man. Anyone asking the AI will receive an answer based on your work, and you never get to see a cent of it. Sure they can click through to the source, but it'll only be a fraction of the original income. The business stagnates and soon everyone is out of a job, possibly with major debts as investments were needed.

Mhmm, you're saying what google is currently doing with their AI snippets that they are implementing by default on their search pages. This will of course backfire on them, but it will take time to do so, long after companies have lost their ability to exist.

Someone sold their work and they didn't get paid. It doesn't matter if it's in the public domain. They deserve to be rewarded for their work. The AI on the other hand does not. At best the AI deserves a sliver for getting the information to the one searching it, just like the search engines of old used to do. Instead they get practically everything.

That is stealing. Taking someone else's work without consent or knowledge and selling it.

Believe it or not, i grew up when there was companies downloading whole BBS sites, slapping it on a CD as 10,000 games on a CD and selling it for like $20. Mind you 95% of it was demos and shareware, things like DOOM, wolfenstein3D but also included things like... saves of Civ1 1 turn before seeing the ending in a perfect scenario win, a 3D model plane for Flight Simulator and the like, etc etc.

On the other hand assuming you could get max the typical bandwidth from a phone line (about 15k/s) you'd need about 30 days of continuous access to the BSS to download the same content. So sometimes it isn't about the money, sometimes it's just about not using resources and saving people time. I remember buying CD's of a linux distro on 8 cd's (Redhat 6?) before for $15; Many hundreds of programmers putting their work for free wouldn't see a cent. But they wouldn't see a cent if i downloaded it myself either. So there's no loss or change in any of that,

I agree this isn't the most ethical thing in the world. But the real world example you give is more about who got paid for ads, not about selling content. Who knows MAYBE someone is buying these models with a tonne of knowledge. But i certainly am not. And i am sure 99% of people aren't either. Leaving only really big companies and corporations who can afford it.

The crux of this is ads however, Google as such is trying to keep all ad revenue, and this indeed is drying up and killing sites. But at the same time, they are gutting themselves, since what they used to feed their system is killing it so they can't improve it later. Not only that because it's based on weights rather than uncompressed information, they will have to archive everything if they want to reference it later. Eventually they will have to host the entire internet in an archived form.

I agree, not good.

The difference with fan fiction and the like is that they are most often harmless. They have little reach and even less likely to make money on it. And here's the kicker, fan fiction at times does get sued for making profit or damaging the brand.

I have stated that AI can be a great boon. Even this unethical and immoral version. But to disregard the big elephants in the room where AI is trained on data that doesn't belong to them, and then passes that on is simply an affront to the creators.

Music, video, the written word, nothing is safe any more. If I propose an idea or article on the internet, it can be poached and offered to an ever growing audience who are willing to pay the AI, but not me. That is a trend that is very dangerous and should be stopped. Anyone's effort should be valued, and not stolen and used for their own gain.

I'm not sure what to think on this. Too long i've seen the corporations being too greedy, easy to find examples of them having 'record profits' and yet fire everyone right before the earning calls so the CEO can get a fat bonus, then they want to re-hire employees at reduced wages or cheaper 'green' employees. And then we see video games that look like dogshit while games they have that are 10+ years old look better than their current slop.

A number of very large corporations that enabled this are about to fall, i believe Disney among them with their umbrella of hundreds of bought companies, brands destroyed by short term profits and push for DEI are going to fall too. I don't think it can be stopped, not anymore. And maybe there will be a reset with new companies taking their place, but it will probably be 20 years at least before things get back to the level they are at right now. Though with social media and tictok and attention spans, that seems unlikely.

I suppose the winning move (like for gambling) is not to play. And as more people pull back disillusioned the whole thing will go into a death spiral, one of their own making.

I don't have an answer for this. Technology moves forward far far faster than the cumbersome law and regulations can slow or stop it.