I've gone and dug myself into an angry mood.

[capri0mni]

I clicked on a YouTube video from a channel called "Nerdy Novelist," titled Why the argument "AI is Stealing" is irrelevant.

I watched it through, hoping he'd eventually get to a better argument against AI (Curious to see if he'd have the same different arguments that I've thought up).

But nope.

His only argument was that tech companies are writing better programs, so they can create "synthetic" training data sets, so they don't have to scrape copyrighted material for their large language models. And someday, book publishers will put compensation clauses into their contracts with writers. And if the computer in your mom's basement is powerful enough, no one will be able to sue you for copyright infringement.

As an example, he said he'd soon be able to user generative AI to write an entire novel in the style of Brandon Sanderson without his permission, 'cause you can't copyright a style (and no one can pinpoint Sanderson's style anyway).

And that was the whole video.

And the comment section was filled with tech-bros talking about how the people who are against AI (especially writers* who are against AI) are fools who are just purists and elitists.

I almost replied with a rant of my own about how "Legal" is not the same as "Ethical," but decided to type all this out here, instead.


*Specifically the writers from NaNoWriMo who are complaining.

Comments

[redbird]

Legal is not the same as ethical, and neither is the same as something being a good idea.

[capri0mni]

LOL! True...

My main objections to Generative AI are: 1) It's a massive (orders of magnitude greater) burden on our energy grids, right when we need to change it, and 2) it's being sold on the idea that learning curves shouldn't exist, and stigmatizes individuality (not fitting with the most common patterns).

[soc_puppet]

Both very good arguments. As to the video you summarize... honestly, I need to make myself a "facepalm" icon, because that's all I have as far as reactions go.

[capri0mni]

It's the most current popular selling point that learning curves are barriers to be avoided (Generate a love poem to your sweetie with a three-word prompt! Make a scribble in MS Paint, and make it look like a Rembrandt portrait!!), instead of the fulfilling and satisfying challenges that they can be that gets me the most depressed, especially as:

1. Commercial products like Grammarly are selling themselves to students with the promise of an easy "A", and
   
2. Schools, from elementary to graduate level, are cutting back on Humanities curricula, and "streamlining" their education to match the requests of corporations who want employees trained in specific skills.

[vilakins]

Ugh.

I've participated in a few Zooniverse projects but refuse to do the ones that train AI to, for example, learn cues about characters' emotions in extracts from novels. Just nope.

[capri0mni]

One of the reasons I'm reluctant to get a new computer is because every new one coming out has Generative AI included as a shiny "New Feature!!" and I'm feeling like I'm not being given any chance to opt out.

[jesse_the_k]

Wow. No.

no

no

[capri0mni]

I'm glad you agree.

Gen. A.I. is taking over so much, with so much "Gee Whiz Willikers!" energy, it sometimes feels like I'm in one of those horror flicks where a fungus is taking over the brains of my neighbors (And considering that people are starting to make Gen A.I romantic partners for themselves, that's not too much hyperbole)