|
Top-level
 Opposing arguments are like this one, also quoted from the Washington Post article above: "generative AI typically produces content only in response to prompts or queries from a user; these responses could be seen as simply remixing content from the third-party websites, whose data it was trained on" If you are taking that broad a definition of "it's just a remix" then buddy, I have news for you about literally all creativity, language, and culture. By that logic, no one is liable for anything 7 comments
Btw follow @willoremus for interesting reporting and analysis like the original linked article, you won't regret it  @darius Yeah. Frankly, I don't get how "it's just remix" could be construed as the entity doing the remix is not responsible for the quality of the remix. This does not even hinge on the question of whether everything is a remix or whether the original creation exists. (I strongly lean toward the former, even if there are very original remixes....). @festal right. It's just a very weak argument from someone desperate to deny liability @darius My devil’s advocate argument would be that the user’s prompts are not just triggering responses, they are actively forming them. There is only so much safeguarding that an AI developer can implement against a user intent on making the AI say something dangerous or libelous. |
Gregory's Server
Obligatory reference to "Everything is a Remix":
https://www.everythingisaremix.info/