NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RareBreed" data-source="post: 9089143" data-attributes="member: 6945590">I see a lot of folks here saying effectively, "AI doesn't have a right to be trained on data without the creator's permission".Every person here who has thought about designing their own roleplaying game, or creating their own world setting, has, like it or not, been "trained" on prior data....and without consent of the authors for doing so.  We humans just take in data naturally and then figure things out.Where I find things get morally and legally hairy is that the companies training the AI should have, at a minimum, paid for the work.  All I need to do to learn and "train" how to make better roleplaying systems is by purchasing some.  That is, in my book, all that the AI companies have to do as well.  If we humans can learn automatically by simply reading or studying art without requiring permission, why should special rules apply for AI?   If you're an English major and you dissect literary forms, are you paying royalties to the estates of deceased authors (or living ones) while studying how they did what they did?The problem is when companies don't even do that.  I suspect that buying all the books out there gets prohibitively expensive.  So I would take issue with a company not purchasing one copy for their algorithms to work on.  But once they have purchased the work (ie, access to the data) do they need permission from the creator for the AI to study it?  If we humans don't need permission from authors to get inspiration from their works, why should a deep learning program?I sometimes suspect that the reason that people demand that AI companies get permission from artists or creators is that we humans are afraid the AI will be better than we are.  They are already better performing at many tasks humans do...why not the arts also?My fears on AI have little to do with "stealing data" and more to do us not knowing how they work, the biases from the data they were trained on, the ease with which their generated works can fool humans, and businesses not having insight and government not having oversight into how this will impact the economy.  For the latter point, perhaps I am being selfish because my career is under threat. For while I sympathized with workers losing jobs to automation, it's different when it hits home.  But another truth is that the majority of the money in the economy is driven by "knowledge workers".  Take away doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc and a LOT of money vanishes.  At some point, people need money to buy things that became more "cost effective" through technology.UBI to the rescue?  Somehow, I don't think that's coming any time soon.</blockquote>

Verification