• aleph@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Big tech companies making vast profits off of users providing data for free instead of paying workers wages in exchange for manufacturing goods is only going to deepen the disparity of wealth in society.

      What we desperately need is essentially a Digital Bill of Rights so that we can legally own our own data.

        • aleph@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Private ownership ≠ capitalism. Monopoly is a critique of free market capitalism, which naturally leads to a concentration of wealth for those who hold all the assets. Giving people ownership of their own data would help redistribute that wealth in a more equitable way.

          No, it won’t fix the underlying problem of Capitalism, but it would at least be a step in the right direction.

          • General_Effort@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Private ownership ≠ capitalism.

            Right. It’s private ownership of capital; aka the means of production. You’re saying that data should be owned because it can be used productively. That’s exactly capitalism for capitalism’s sake.

            This is a typical economically right-wing approach. There is a problem, so you just create a new kind of property and call it done. The magic of the market takes care of it, or something. I don’t understand why one would expect a different result from trying the same thing.

            • aleph@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              The point of it is to redistribute wealth using the existing capitalist framework, which is a left-wing endeavour.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You already own everything by default unless you forfeit your rights by implicitly accepting terms and conditions of a specific service.

  • mechoman444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t understand what the issue here is? Are people upset that companies that own the AI will churn profit from the free data available on the Internet for them to be trained on?

    If so, this is a hypocritical double standard. We use the Internet for the free information ourselves. We train ourselves but if a company does it for AI all of the sudden all that free information suddenly needs to be paid for because it’s an incorporated institution?

    Y’all need to figure out how free you want this content to be because there’s no in-between.

    • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      exactly. if a human painter looks at a bunch of posted images to practice with, it’s okay. If a computer does it, it’s evil.

      Both the human artist and the computer eventually create something someone wants to pay for, and neither paid for looking at other people’s art.

      it’s a double standard.

  • cmrn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    IMO it’s one thing if you posted things publicly on the internet and it’s getting scraped, in the same way a human would find it.

    But it’s disgusting when all these companies retroactively update their TOS, or force you into zero privacy to continue using their service.

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      This is the entire issue for me.

      Privatizing what is otherwise public content, and then privatizing the models that are trained on that content and making me pay for having it regurgitated back at me.

      I think AI would be really cool, IF:

      • it wasn’t being shoved into every goddamn thing
      • it wasn’t being used as justification to cut jobs
      • it was a open source project and wasn’t being gatekept by capitalist interests
  • Ephera@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yeah, I’m genuinely feeling like I don’t want to publish things I create onto the internet, because these companies will gladly break laws to use it. Companies spent decades building up ridiculous copyright laws and when they go to violate those laws themselves, law enforcement fails.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Just create demented shitposts that will poison any AI, like the ones trained on Reddit posts telling users to put glue on their pizza and make chlorine gas.