An update to Google’s privacy policy suggests that the entire public internet is fair game for it’s AI projects. If Google can read your words, assume they belong to the company now, and expect that they’re nesting somewhere in the bowels of a chatbot.

  • Big P@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think they belong to the company any more than the words you read belong to you

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly, this reads like hysteria. If you’ve placed your words on a public website, it’s a shocked Pikachu moment when someone (or in the case of an AI-in-training something) reads those words. It’s basic fair use.

      If someone put up a billboard with some text on it and then got angry whenever someone else read it I would question their sanity. Even if that “someone” was the Google street view car.

      • LostXOR@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I don’t really see the fuss about people’s content being used to train AIs. It’s not really any different from a human reading your content and using their brain to make something similar.

        • clb92@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          There’s a surprising number of people who seem to think LLMs contain a database of everything it’s trained with, and that it just spits out snippets from there. There are also lots of very vocal artists against image generation models who claim that these 5-10 GB models contain all their copyrighted art, claiming that the models just create collages from existing images.

          People simply don’t understand how these things work.