• ejs@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    How it currently exists, yes in most cases it is trained on stolen cognitive labor. Do you think this is inherent to the technology itself, however? Consider a model trained on entirely public domain data, or non-copyleft liscence not requiring attribution. E.g., talkie

    Totally agree that we need strict regulation.

    If only we lived in a society where people could be freely able to produce cognitive labor while also being guaranteed a dignified life with universal basic services and income, regardless of what they produce. Then, like with piracy, LLM training, in my opinion, could be trained on anything without harming original authors.

    • adam_y@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I mean that’s a wonderful “what if” situation. Universal basic income and an expanded commons.

      But I’m going to pull you up on the notion of cognitive labour.

      Most artists and writers are not just coming up with ideas but actually executing them.

      Creating pictures, even digitally, usually requires the artist to place their body in a location for a duration and perform (often repetitive) tasks.

      This is manual labour too. They chose to exchange their physical existence for the creation of this work.

      The same is true of most writers too. Not just the typing up of their ideas, but frequently the physical process of acquiring the material to express those ideas. Travelling for interviews. Talking to people.

      So yeah, don’t let them get away with suggesting that theft was purely “cognitive labour” because that finishes the crime.