• BitSound@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Good to hear that people won’t be able to weaponize the legal system into holding back progress

    EDIT, tl;dr from below: Advocate for open models, not copyright. It’s the wrong tool for this job

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      2 years ago

      AI keeps getting cited as the next big thing that will shape the world. I think this is an appropriate time to use the legal system to make sure those changes happen in a way that won’t screw everything up.

      The progress will happen whether we like it or not, taking a moment to clarify rules is a good thing

      • BitSound@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        The rules I’ve seen proposed would kill off innovation, and allow other countries to leapfrog whatever countries tried to implement them.

        What rules do you think should be put in place?

        • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          If any commercial use of AI generated art required some transfer of money from the company using it to the artists whose work was included in training the models, it’d probably be a step in the right direction.

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        I think this is an appropriate time to use the legal system to make sure those changes happen in a way that won’t screw everything up.

        Tell me which rules would definitely do that without screwing it up worse, for this obscenely complicated technology that’s only meaningfully existed for about a year. I could use a laugh.