You must log in or register to comment.
They are also trying to take away these free resources by pushing laws to make ID identification mandatory to make money off of us.
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
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.
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.
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.
Hey, remember that time Aaron Swartz used public APIs and perfectly legal aggregation of information to compile scientific journals in a data set outside the paywall. And he was arrested, prosecuted, and threatened with life in prison until he (allegedly) killed himself?
Then his original and highly lucrative pet project, Reddit, was mutated into a propaganda factory by the Epstein Class, cannibalized by the Investor Class, and gutted for AI slop by the Tech Sector?
At least, academic papers give credits to the author… Or to the author’s boss
I don’t even know why they charge such high prices.
I don’t work in academia but I am curious about thing and look up papers all the time.
I have never bought a single one at those ridiculous prices. But if they were reasonable like $1-$3 or something I probably would have an di imagine a lot of people would have.
You make more if 100 people buy a $1 item than 3 people buying a $30 item and the world benefits more.
Because they can. It really is just a cartell. Especially institutions pay a fortune for bundled access.
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
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.
which is why any opensource project should have strict restrictions about how companies are allowed to use it.
big companies can (currently) legally pirate books/movies/media from torrenting sites in order to train ai algos. Source: Meta Lawsuit
Indeed, the courts have shockingly given a pass to torrenting down unauthorized copies to the LLM companies, versus how they destroyed some lives of private individuals for similar behavior…
You see, there is a huge difference you are missing here….
They are billionaires
Fun fact, recently had an argument with someone defending the favorable tax situation for the ultra wealthy.
Their argument was that billionaires did not have as much “real money” as middle class people so of course the middle class people should pay more in taxes…
Relevant to nothing, but just thinking of favorable billionaire treatment right now triggers that thought…
Doesn’t really stop them from ignoring it anyway.
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.
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.
deleted by creator
And the US government is doing anything
isn’t doing anything
Yeah that’s what I meant
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.
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.
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.
A powerful argument if one cannot tell the difference between a person and a product.
Large amounts of data were pirated, which is apparently legal if you’re training an AI. Source: Meta lawsuit
Library implies consent that was not there and access to the public that was not there.
Except these people are turning around and burningdown the libraries once they’ve read all the books.
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.
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.
the government is not allowed to provide a service for free that a company can charge for
I am beyond mildly infuriated by such an idiotic stance, but it tracks with what I’ve seen.
RIP postal service you’re next.
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
Government issues the business licenses. Seems like someone needs to be reminded who has who by the balls.
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.
Yup. Government has businesses by the balls.
I don’t think that they do anymore. Not in the US.
The opposite is true here.
In case anyone didn’t know the answer is business as in business has the government by the balls.
As intended by the founding fathers, of course
we built the library, someone else is charging admission
So fucking close to getting it…
If youre suggesting that this is the grander issue with capitalism, you arent wrong but i think that subtext is already there. Its sort of a cascade effect. AI is just the latest iteration of manufactured scarcity/convenience.
Tail as old as land
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.
Coincidentally, OOP just explained academic publishing to a T.
clenches fist
A parasite can take different shapes but only one form.
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.
Wdym? Scientists usually don’t get paid to publish. The person you replied to, probably meant academic publishing as in:
- Scientist does research and compiles manuscript, usually via public money, even in shithole countries like the US
- Scientist submits manuscript to for profit journal
- Journal outsources proofreading to other scientists, who do it for free
- Manuscript is accepted or revised on scientists time and money
- Scientist pays for publishing
- For Profit journal either charges extra for “open” publication or charges scientist and other scientists for access, usually by agreements with the respective library
- Profit! (On the journals part)
Where is the split of compensation? For patents there is, but for academic publishing usually not.
You also forgot how scientist is required to publish regularly to keep their job, and to find new jobs. So this process is far from optional.
That aside, that was an excellent write up. You should publish that to a journal or something. 😏
You are missing the point, it’s not about education, but publishing. Read about Elsevier, and how Aaron Swartz died
I did fine without AI, they can charge what they want.
Not buying it anywayI 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
I don’t know the difference between bad advice and good advice anymore
Don’t actually eat anyone, cannabalism is likely to lead to prion folding diseases. Which is a terrible way to die.
I don’t care at this point. I’m getting my bite.
Styrofoam and diesel are great for toppling governments. Douse the rich!
Don’t use diesel. It’s hard to ignite with just a lighter. Use gasoline and styrofoam for your homemade bonfire starter. It’ll ignite much easier and stick to all those logs that tend to hoard…leaves.
Good advice. We are basically giving them their plastics and petrochemicals back at no cost.
… To the logs
Be careful with gasoline. It’s flammable enough for the flame to climb up the spout. Ask me how i know, kids are dumb… (i.e. me circa age 10)
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.
Nobody talks about what came next.
Most of the monarchies and aristocrats in Europe fell / lost all real power / reformed themselves to avoid losing their heads?
Humanity actually successfully implemented a decentralized egalitarian socialist society without dictatorships in 1936 Spain, which bore out that Anarchist political theory is the most viable long-term solution we have to achieving freedom for all while also ensuring everyone is able to live a fulfilling life by providing free housing, food, transportation and healthcare.
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.
It led directly to Napoleon conquering Europe and crowning himself Emperor of France…
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.
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.
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.
At this point in time just blow out everyone’s bank accounts and start over again.
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.
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.
Selling it to who though? And who gets the money from the sale? Taxes? But rich people already control the government…
It’s like you invented democracy with extra sauce 😁👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
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.
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.
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.
Dibs on ribs
Rfk has peen dibs
