this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
429 points (99.3% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

52563 readers
268 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Do as I say, not as I do!

This is why piracy is actually a fundamental human right. Because if we left everything up to companies, they would do whatever the fuck they wanted and hide behind the legitimacy of being a company which in most peoples eyes makes them inherently "right".

[–] sunzu@kbin.run 129 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Ain't it great!!!

The law protects mega corps but not peasants.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 1 week ago

Aye exactly mate, down with the mega corps!

[–] HouseWolf@lemm.ee 22 points 1 week ago

Rules for thee but not for me

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In I2P we trust 🙏 Can't sue what you can't find.

Anti Commercial-AI license

[–] sunzu@kbin.run 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's like Tor, but different.

[–] sunzu@kbin.run 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well it wasn't made by the US Navy, it doesn't allow for clearnet traffic, it allows torrenting over the protocol. I'm sure there are other differences too.

[–] gwen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

tor was made by the us navy???

Originally, yes. It was made to help people in countries with censorship get around censorship.

Nowadays it's maintained by the Tor Project.

[–] Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

!i2p@lemmy.world

[–] zaknenou@lemmy.dbzer0.com 99 points 1 week ago (1 children)

it's okay when the bourgeois does it

[–] halm@leminal.space 22 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Yeah, but we're not looking at the root cause here. Their purpose is to train energy glutton, error prone "AI" even if experience teaches us that those ML models fuck up more often than confirmation bias allows.

"AI" is a bourgeoise and Capitalist tool and, same as with cryptocurrency, we cannot dismantle the master's house with the master's tools. Fuck AI down the drain. Make things with your own minds, your own hands.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 week ago

It's even more okay when the bourgeoisie does it in the interest of potential profit gain.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 98 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The Internet Archive is currently fighting in the courts to maintain free digital library access to over 500,000 books they own from their own collection, yet Meta uses a pirated dataset of nearly 200,000 books to train their proprietary AI and is just allowed to get away with that??

Publishers will go after a charity making fair use of their content, but not the corporation outright stealing from them. What utter bollocks.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

IA is the easier target. This system sucks.

[–] chahk@beehaw.org 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Easy solution. "The Internet Archive" should rebrand itself to "Archiving the Internet" to confuse everyone who talks about how "AI" should be able to steal books.

[–] k110111@feddit.de 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Harward: get this man over here!

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

MlT (MlT): please accept this honorary PhD

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

piracy is the correct and moral thing to do here

if they dont give a fuck they dont have the moral highground to guilt tripping us into stopping it

[–] veniasilente@lemm.ee 74 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If Meta can pirate stuff, then the Internet Archive can pirate stuff and I can also pirate stuff. Fair is fair.

[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca 61 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ah, common mistake. The law is only for poor people, you see. Don't you feel silly now?

[–] veniasilente@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

I feel so silly that I wouldn't even know how to describe it.

I know! I'll pirate hundreds of books from well-known authors so that I can easily find a useful metaphor.

[–] archchan@lemmy.ml 67 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So the evil mega corp gets a free pass while the Internet Archive regularly has to fight for open access to knowledge. Fuck that and fuck Meta.

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 15 points 1 week ago

Welcome to Capitalism, please leave your cash by the front desk, and remembered, no refunds!

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 54 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Meta has acknowledged using parts of the Books3 dataset but argued that its use of copyrighted works to train LLMs did not require "consent, credit, or compensation." The company refutes claims of infringing the plaintiffs' "alleged" copyrights, contending that any unauthorized copies of copyrighted works in Books3 should be considered fair use.

Furthermore, Meta is disputing the validity of maintaining the legal action as a Class Action lawsuit, refusing to provide any monetary "relief" to the suing authors or others involved in the Books3 controversy. The dataset, which includes copyrighted material sourced from the pirate site Bibliotik, was targeted in 2023 by the Danish anti-piracy group Rights Alliance, demanding that digital archiving of the Books3 dataset should be banned and is using DMCA notices to enforce those takedowns.

Yet they'll ~~spend~~ waste billions on metaverse.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 31 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)

What sort of crack are they on that they think unauthorized use of an entire work for commercial gain is fair use? I think copywrite laws are ridiculous but that is a pretty low bar they are trying to set.

They should have to pay for their usage or retrain the model without it. Going to guess they would prefer to pay up.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] steal_your_face@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Wonder how they feel about someone else using scraped Facebook posts to train an LLM

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

Cranky enough to demand satisfaction (in the courts if not the dueling field), but no one in the company will think their own ire warrants empathy for those from whom they pirate.

[–] MylesRyden@social.vivaldi.net 35 points 1 week ago

@Flatworm7591

And yet, I can't read a book that Internet Archive actually owns a copy of.

[–] people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 1 week ago

It'd be better if they went after literally every other AI corp than Meta in this case. Meta is the only one that's ironically releasing open-source models and leading the way for open-source LLMs. I don't want Meta to stop doing this.

[–] Marin_Rider@aussie.zone 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I just asked it about this and it denied it. Then I said Meta acknowledged it and you are lying and it apologised and said it did use copywrite material without permission. Fuck I hate AI

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 week ago (4 children)

For anyone else that was curious. This makes me feel sick. People are already treating AI as some unbiased font of all knowledge, training it to lie to people is surely not going to cause any issues at all (stares at HAL 9000).

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Internal documents on how the AI was trained were obviously not part of the training data, why would they be. So it doesn't know how it was trained, and as this tech always does, it just hallucinates an English sounding answer. It's not "lying", it's just glorified autocomplete. Saying things like "it's lying" is overselling what it is. As much as any other thing that doesn't work is not malicious, it just sucks.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 6 points 1 week ago

I apologize for the confusion

Meta is working to address these concerns

Sure, they are working to solve these concerns by teaching their LLM to lie and obfuscate, and by becoming so big nobody sues them anymore. I'm sick of this.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 8 points 1 week ago

Of course, why would you pay for pirated media?

[–] YourPrivatHater@ani.social 7 points 1 week ago

Who doesn't?

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

I don't care if the robot that speaks English read the entire library.

How else was it going to happen?

[–] Barzaria@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm no fan of megacorps, and I definitely know that they are breaking the law. However, copyright laws should change so that any schmuck can use any text to train any AI. I'm all for punishing mega corporations and I understand that they play by their own set of rules (that is unfair), but piracy is piracy even when mega corporations do it and I believe that piracy is the moral choice. Meta then choosing to make their model not fully open I definitely have a problem with and that does not meet my bar for okay, but I strongly believe that all information for all people or entities should be free to transfer without restriction.

[–] chahk@beehaw.org 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Agreed about changing the copyright law.

Until that happens though, they must not be allowed to have it both ways - call us "pirates" when we copy their shit without paying for it, and tell us that paying for shit they copy is "impossible".

[–] Barzaria@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

Indeed, completely agree. In this case they are the pirates.

[–] people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 week ago

Meta's llama models are generally open. In fact Meta is the main megacorp that's driving open-source AI right now. Everyone else keeps their models proprietary.

[–] Facebones@reddthat.com 3 points 1 week ago
load more comments
view more: next ›