A.I. experts downplay ‘nightmare scenario of evil robot overlords’. Over 1,300 sign letter claiming it’s a ‘force for good, not a threat to humanity’ (fortune.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

57 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In an open letter published on Tuesday, more than 1,370 signatories—including business founders, CEOs and academics from various institutions including the University of Oxford—said they wanted to “counter ‘A.I. doom.’”

“A.I. is not an existential threat to humanity; it will be a transformative force for good if we get critical decisions about its development and use right,” they insisted.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

👉🏼“AI stole my book/art” is not that different from “show me in the search results, but only enough that people click through to my page”

👉🏼 “AI is taking all the jobs” is not that different from “you outsourced all the jobs overseas”

👉🏼 “the AI lied to me!” is not that different from “that twitter handle lied about me!”

The main difference is scale, speed and cost. Things continue to speed up, social norms and regulations fall behind faster. #ai

@SSUPII @throws_lemy @technology

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

AI scraping and stealing people's art is literally nothing like a search engine.

Maybe that would hold up if the original artist was paid and credited/linked to, but right now there is literally zero upside to having your artwork stolen by big tech.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

@donuts would you please share your thinking?

I certainly agree that you can see the current wave of Generative AI development as “scraping and stealing people’s art.” But it’s not clear to me why crawling the web and publishing the work as a model is more problematic than publishing crawl results through a search engine.

@throws_lemy @SSUPII @technology

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

@donuts

For example, image search has been contentious for very similar reasons.

You post a picture online for people to see, and host some adds to make some money when people look at it.
Then Google starts showing the picture in image search results.
People view the image on Google and never visit your site or click on your ads. Worst case, google hot links it and you incur increased hosting costs with zero extra ad revenue

@throws_lemy @SSUPII @technology

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

@donuts

I certainly think that a Generative AI model is a more significant harm to the artist, because it impacts future, novel work in addition to already-published work.

However in both cases the key issue is a lack of clear & enforceable licensing on the published image. We retreat to asking “is this fair use?” and watching for new Library of Congress guidance. We should do better.

@throws_lemy @SSUPII @technology

load more comments (1 replies)

this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023

62 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37603 readers

607 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]