This is just one action in a coming conflict. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. Does the record industry win and digital likenesses become outlawed, even taboo? Or does voice, appearance etc just become another sets of rights that musicians will have to negotiate during a record deal?

  • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    whether it’s something that individuals have access to

    No we don’t. That’s the box being opened.

    Here’s a leaked google internal memo telling them as such: https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-we-have-no-moat-and-neither

    tl;dr: The open source community has accomplished more in a month of Meta’s AI weights being released than everything we have, and shows no signs of slowing down. We have no secret sauce, no way to prevent anyone from setting up their own, and the opensource community already has almost-GPT equivalents running on old laptops and they’re targeting the model running directly on the phone, making our expensive single ai solutions entirely obsolete.

    Edit:

    In addition, these corporations only have AI in the first place by stealing/scraping data from regular people and the open source community. Individuals should not feel obligated to honor any rule or directive that these technologies be owned and operated by only big players.

    • greenskye@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only advantage corporations could have had came from having the money to throw at extremely high quality training data. The fact that they cheaped out and just used whatever they could find on the internet (or paid a vendor, who just used AI to generate AI training data) has definitely contributed to the lack of any differentiating advantage.