• tomalley8342@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    It’s the same completely reasonable standards we hold for everybody else? I am just as curious as you are. Does the fact that “‘not guzzling all the information and media from people who specifically don’t want them to’ is such a difficult and infeasible proposition that they can’t possibly honor it” not set off any alarm bells for you? morally?

    • BJW@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      No, because the information does not disappear. It is not gone. It is unchanged. The availability is the same before, as after. The number of people with access to the information “guzzled” is unaffected. I don’t know how many different ways to say “it doesn’t matter” there are.

      • tomalley8342@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        I got that much. I’m not sure why you were asking whether I was being facetious or not considering that I initially (and correctly) clocked you as not giving a shit about such consent. And going back to the original post, you really don’t seem any different from your typical ai bro in your careless attitude towards the art/textbooks/family photos your ai models guzzle up during traning. Why pretend otherwise?

        • BJW@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I was asking if you were being facetious because it’s such a ridiculous ask. It would be literally impossible. Large swathes of the Internet are completely random, so there would be no way to know who to even contact. Even if it wasn’t impossible from that aspect, many of those you’d need to contact won’t still be alive, or in a mental state in which they can even give consent. Ignoring both of those challenges, the logistics of contacting everyone and tracking who had and had not responded would be a Herculean effort. It’s just a bonkers thing to ask that I had to assume you were just saying shit to rile me up, because the alternative was not flattering to your mental capabilities.

          What the hell is a “typical AI bro” and why do you feel the need to use immature nicknames for people? Should I say “you are such a typical AI hoe” to mean the opposite of whatever you mean?

          If the art/textbooks/family photos are unchanged, still available, and in no way harmed, why does it even matter? There’s literally no way to know if any given image was even used. If they didn’t tell you, it would be impossible to know. Asking for consent for something that doesn’t change anything and is impossible to discern even happened is laughable. Why would literally anyone care?

          It’s like saying you need to get consent from someone to think about them.

          • tomalley8342@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            What the hell is a “typical AI bro”

            I would certainly and accurately use this label for the kind people parroting the same “too difficult” excuse as AI lobby groups for one.

            Have they (or you) considered that if it’s too difficult to do in a way that respects the consent of the people you’re taking from, maybe you shouldn’t do it? (Rhetorical question of course, I know you already gave such excuses as “the cat’s out of the bag”, etc).

            Why would literally anyone care?

            Clearly the many creators of the work they’re taking from care. Do you only respect consent when you happen to agree with their world view?

            • BJW@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Stop reading my messages I’ve put on the Internet. You’re not allowed to get any information from them without my consent. It doesn’t matter that it’s public information as soon as I post it. You don’t have my consent. Why are you still reading? You don’t have my consent to read this.

              See how stupid that is?