all 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 20 points 2 years ago (1 child)

If you read the article you find this was a dataset from a nonprofit, available to anyone. The nonprofit used captions from a set of YouTube videos.

“Most of the Pile’s datasets are accessible and open for anyone on the internet with enough space and computing power to access them.”

That anyone included a lot of other big names in tech, not just Apple.

Also I wasn’t aware that Apple had its own AI. I thought they were licensing stuff from others like OpenAI. I guess maybe this is some research project for an unannounced project?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And…?

    Not defending Apple here, but everyone with a vested interest in AI is doing it. Nobody is asking permission or respecting copyright in this race to the bottom.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    No consent? I bet Google said yes.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago
    [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    they don't respect us? gasp!

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Yeah?

    AI models have been trained on every comment and JPG on the internet... and commercial movies on DVD... and every book in the library.

    Shoveling all of the content through a sluice of linear algebra is pretty dang transformative. The more they use, the less any piece matters.

  • source
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    Oh look apple biased mkbhd

  • source
  • [+] -11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Children in libraries are learning to read using books without consent from the authors

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Children don’t make millions by selling copies of all the books they skimmed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago*

    Most children don't (sick burn against the Grimm Brothers). I mean, fuck Apple and all of these companies, but they're hoovering data from a publicly available resource using totally legal means.

    I know I'm snowballing here, but overreacting to this headline could end up supporting those who argue that web crawlers, plane-tracking bots, and the completely legal actions of Aaron Swartz that the Feds tried using to crucify him.

    Once again, fuck Apple, but the real villain in this scenario is either Google for allowing companies to train their AI models on their content, or the content creators who are still using YouTube.

    Since I can't fault anyone who is trying to make a living by exploring Google, then I guess I'll just add "fuck Google" to the pile.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    As long as AI also watched ads it's a fair game.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments