@iinac @aziz @jeffowski @blogdiva absolutely. The issue you and I are having is that we disagree that there’s a way to do what your proposing that makes financial sense for both the provider/producer of the data and the business training the model.
@iinac @aziz @jeffowski @blogdiva Let’s just say we apply US copyright law to the art ai companies have already used. (We should btw). Any dollar amounts paid out that would have any material benefit to the artists would immediately end those companies. And America didn’t lose it’s advantage, american AI companies did (assuming deepseek works as advertised)
@daedalean @iinac @aziz @blogdiva --
You know that you've used a very specific logic fallacy here?
One thing does not lead to another.
Paying the artists will not bankrupt the #AI companies.
AGAIN, we already have a working model to show you how it can be done with Music royalties and how it should be applied to AI.
Again, we have a willingness of one side to accept the injustice and accept the harms while the other profits, while shouting down a solution without any evidence.
@jeffowski @daedalean @iinac @aziz @blogdiva
Well so far, Jeff's solution is the smartest actually workable approach to this I've seen. I think if we retroactively charged companies for all the data they stole, and those companies folded as a side effect, I'd see that as a bonus . Thieves don't deserve to keep operating. If data was instead purchased the way Jeff suggested it would be more sustainable. I still have environmental concerns but it's better than the status quo at least.
@jeffowski @daedalean @iinac @aziz @blogdiva
The biggest issue right now though is how to actually make that happen with all the billionaires and fascism running around.
@PersistentDreamer @jeffowski @iinac @aziz @blogdiva which is why, while we should, we will not.
@PersistentDreamer @jeffowski @iinac @aziz @blogdiva like I said, we should.
@jeffowski @iinac @aziz @blogdiva no logical fallacy, just an understanding of the scale of data (content) theft that has occurred.
@jeffowski @iinac @aziz @blogdiva you think a company having to pay out more $ in liability then it has available does not logically lead to it going out of business?
@daedalean @iinac @aziz @blogdiva --
Again, One does not lead to the other since you have no evidence for it other than saying it, while I have several working models of this royalties plan in Apple Music, Pandora, and Spotify, showing you that it in fact DOES WORK.
@jeffowski @iinac @aziz @blogdiva accusing me of number 9 then saying it’s because of step A, not the lack of logic from A to B says everything anyone should need to know about your understanding of the critical thinking skills you assert you have. Also a thing you just claim btw. I already said AI use and reselling content creators offer to you is a different thing. The content for AI was stolen not offered under any licensing agreement.
@daedalean @iinac @aziz @blogdiva --
"Any dollar amounts paid out that would have any material benefit to the artists would immediately end those companies." CITATION PLEASE.
You've made an assertion without ANY evidence and your whole argument is based on this spurious logic.