Investigators recovered two stolen trailers carrying $1.3 million in data center supplies, including copper wire and infrastructure equipment.
Investigators recovered two stolen trailers carrying $1.3 million in data center supplies, including copper wire and infrastructure equipment.
You don’t think AI eliminating vast swaths of jobs and exasperating the wealth inequality that’s starving the economy has anything to do with an increase in poor and desperate people willing to resort to crime to surive? You do realise that data centers and AI are directly dependent, yes? That conclusion is just burying your head in the sand. Let’s not forget who started the moral finger wagging here, pointing to one crime while blinding themselves to another for whatever the irrational reasoning is. Like this particular crime is just happening in a vacuum, and AI isn’t infiltrating every aspect of society by design. What’s it like to be that selective?
“no copyright infringement has been found to have occurred in the training of flagship AI models” I’m just not going to engage with this level of disingenuous assertion, you’re either deluded or you’re a liar.
Okay, I’ll address this briefly.
When a human artist paints a painting and sells it, does the estate of Michelangelo receive royalties because that artist was inspired by his work?
The reason you believe LLM training is copyright infringement is that you fundamentally misunderstand how the technology works. That’s a common theme on this platform among people who oppose AI. Many dislike it because it’s become the popular position, not because they understand how these models actually function.
When an AI generates something, it creates a novel output in response to a prompt. It is producing something new, not copying existing works verbatim. Copyright infringement generally requires copying protected expression, and simply learning patterns from publicly available data is not the same thing.
Moreover, you can’t have it both ways. If information is publicly available, then it is available to be read, analyzed, and learned from. Either it’s public, or it isn’t.
More importantly, none of this was the point of my original comment. I’m only addressing it because you clearly want to discuss AI.
For the record, I am completely opposed to what many companies are doing with AI data centers. I think the current trajectory is environmentally damaging, economically questionable, and, in some cases, a humanitarian concern. I’ve said this repeatedly. You’re free to believe me or not, I can’t prove my sincerity, but that has been my position throughout.
Now, would you like to discuss the actual topic of conversation, the two-faced nature of Lemmy?
You couldn’t pay me enough to waste my brain cells on your disingenuous, fart-sniffing sophistry and bad faith horseshit, so no I don’t think I will, get better please.
So basically there’s nothing you can do to refute what I’m saying because it’s all true so you resort to “nuh-uh” with a thesaurus.