FaceDeer

I’m not expecting them to do anything specifically to benefit the rest of us. But let them fight. If nothing else, it costs them money.

You don’t think the publishing industry would like to sue Meta over this?

Well, yes, why would you believe something without seeing it? But given how litigious the publishing industry is about this kind of thing I don’t see it as likely that they wouldn’t fight.

They’ll compare the amount the publishers are demanding against how much it would cost them to lawyer up to prevent that and any future payments. Meta’s heavyweight enough that they can use “lobbying their way out of the law, aka changing the law so that they’re not violating it at all” as a strategy.

If they do simply pay the publishers off, oh well, at least it’s just the status quo. But I don’t see a reason to assume that’s the way this is going to go. Other countries have already carved explicit exceptions to copyright for AI training, Meta would be in favor of that kind of thing.

You think Meta will just roll over and hand out whatever penalties the publishers demand of them?

Meta isn’t going to be defending us. It’s going to be defending itself. Because it is now one of us.

I think this is still going to be a net benefit to us, though. Meta may not have contributed much bandwidth, which is leeching in the short term, but in the long term they’re now forced to contribute something much more important; lawyer power. Meta is going to have to fight to defend piracy.

Anything that pushes back copyright is fine by me.

A local model is just a giant matrix of numbers, so as long as you’re running it locally you can be sure it’s not secretly recording or communicating information with any outside source. Just make sure you trust the software that’s running it (there’s plenty of open source alternatives for that that have nothing to do with China).

And since it’s an open weight model, any remaining reluctance to talk about whatever subject can be abliterated or fine-tuned away if it’s really a problem.

Except it’s not denying service, so it’s just a D.

Joke’s on you, I have a dishwasher machine! Robots do my dishes for me too! It is you who is the dumb one, having to labor manually as you do!

Ah, there we go. Thanks.

Huh. Based on the community this was posted in, I can assume that the answer the video comes to is “yes” and not watch it. But according to Betteridge’s law of headlines the answer is “no.” I need to argue about this without watching it but I don’t know what stance to argue about.

Ah! I’ll use the Orbit plugin to get an AI to summarize the video for me. Hm. The AI-generated summary says the video describes an anecdote about music copyright violations, talks about some ethical considerations about both music and software piracy, and then:

The speaker concludes by acknowledging the complexity of the issue and the importance of considering the perspectives of all parties involved.

So I guess the answer was “Maybe?” How am I supposed to have a pointless Internet argument about “Maybe?”

Bah. Someone attack me for using AI, at least that’s a debate I can sink my teeth into.