14 Jul 2026 04:37
AI giants learn what everyone else on the modern internet already knows
At least the models like Qwen have open weight versions. Itโs the same concept as distributing compiled binaries, though, whereas we really need true FOSS models where all of the code and training data are available under a permissive license. All of these models were trained on copyleft-licensed content, so all of it should be FOSS if the licenses were actually being respected. From that perspective, distillation attacks shouldnโt even be necessary and I couldnโt give two shits that there is no honor among thieves when the real thievery is that these models are closed source.
Political lobbying is just a higer form of lawyering... most legislators (and virtually all judges) are ex-lawyers.
14 Jul 2026 04:46
This is how we know AI should be a collectivist project, one that isn't owned by large corporations but is funded by taxes and developed in academies, and all IP derived from it falls into the public domain.
Besides which a lot of artists mind a lot less when their material is borrowed by a non-profit, or to serve a public works project. (There are exceptions. Disney is notoriously litigious about murals in nurseries.)
PS: Development of a robust public domain is the _only_ reason that intellectual property should exist at all. Also it's not _property_ so much as a licensed temporary monopoly.
PSS: History has already shown us that people will invent stuff and do fabulous art simply by being allowed to live in a state other than desperation. Public welfare programs beget art booms. The most recent example of this was during the COVID-19 lockdown which came with extended unemployment and stimulus checks, resulting in the Great Resignation in which a lot of people turned their hobbies into something lucrative.
Besides which a lot of artists mind a lot less when their material is borrowed by a non-profit, or to serve a public works project. (There are exceptions. Disney is notoriously litigious about murals in nurseries.)
PS: Development of a robust public domain is the _only_ reason that intellectual property should exist at all. Also it's not _property_ so much as a licensed temporary monopoly.
PSS: History has already shown us that people will invent stuff and do fabulous art simply by being allowed to live in a state other than desperation. Public welfare programs beget art booms. The most recent example of this was during the COVID-19 lockdown which came with extended unemployment and stimulus checks, resulting in the Great Resignation in which a lot of people turned their hobbies into something lucrative.
14 Jul 2026 06:46
havnt they realized they eventually will train thier "llm" on slop created by other LLM slop.
14 Jul 2026 07:37
You just need to keep zooming to see it. It takes awhile but it is worth it!
14 Jul 2026 07:44
Awww, shuck. Pot. Kettle. Black.
As if the parrots' dictionary wasn't stolen from millions of content creators.
As if the parrots' dictionary wasn't stolen from millions of content creators.
14 Jul 2026 08:06
Funny cause there's a similar meme in France about a tv host who used to repeat "BUT DO YOU CONDEMN HAMAS" with an exaggerated Arabic "rrramas" pronunciation
14 Jul 2026 09:24
Yeah it has to be open weight and free to use for everybody, with regulation to tag all AI output as generated so we know what is what.
The worst outcome would be if somehow all open weight AI models that can't show their training data will be subject to some kind of tax or rent by AI / IP collection agencies, ultimately going to the plutocrats. That would be techno feudalism. Big corporations can afford to negotiate and pay license fees and often profit from cumbersome regulation too that prevents others from producing value. So the worst outcome is if we have robots doing all the work, and all the robot IP is owned by the techno-feudalists. And we can't even use robots to help with subsistence farming because we can't pay the expensive AI IP licenses.
The worst outcome would be if somehow all open weight AI models that can't show their training data will be subject to some kind of tax or rent by AI / IP collection agencies, ultimately going to the plutocrats. That would be techno feudalism. Big corporations can afford to negotiate and pay license fees and often profit from cumbersome regulation too that prevents others from producing value. So the worst outcome is if we have robots doing all the work, and all the robot IP is owned by the techno-feudalists. And we can't even use robots to help with subsistence farming because we can't pay the expensive AI IP licenses.
14 Jul 2026 09:42