Massive companies have been violating GPL and other copyleft licenses long before AI became a thing, but on the other way around: by modifying code an...
Massive companies have been violating GPL and other copyleft licenses long before AI became a thing, but on the other way around: by modifying code and not making the changes publicly accessible.
Once again, legal systems around the world have turned the blind eye for them, while simultaneously extending the expiration date of patents of potentially life changing medications and other shady stuff.
It is very clear that the system practices double standards, any and everything can and will be subverted to serve their interests.
Still, even if we take GPL to be a gentleman’s agreement, it would be desirable to build and promote ways to ensure a given LLM was trained on ethically sourced data… either willingly or not i.e. poisoning should at the very least make it possible to fingerprint data that “didn’t want to be there” (though most current poisoning tools target protecting audiovisual media).
——
Another way people look at it is like “since this thing snooped from everyone, everyone has the right to use it”, time doesn’t go backwards, the damage is already done so you should try to recover your losses through it.
“If you don’t do it, someone else will”.
Same kind of sunken cost fallacy with (ab)using tax funded “public” services.
——-
I don’t like this situation TBH, but I also don’t feel like shaming the plebs is going to help anything.
The people who threw molotovs into Scam Altman’s mansion had their hearts in the right place but even if their plan succeeded, there’s no putting the genie back into the lamp.
