Technology

37804 readers

177 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

Los@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

remington@beehaw.org

232

Technologist: 'Fining Big Tech isn't working, make them give away illegally trained LLMs as public domain' (www.theregister.com)

submitted 4 days ago by thelucky8@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org

37 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Archived link

Opinionated article by Alexander Hanff, a computer scientist and privacy technologist who helped develop Europe's GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) and ePrivacy rules.

We cannot allow Big Tech to continue to ignore our fundamental human rights. Had such an approach been taken 25 years ago in relation to privacy and data protection, arguably we would not have the situation we have to today, where some platforms routinely ignore their legal obligations at the detriment of society.

Legislators did not understand the impact of weak laws or weak enforcement 25 years ago, but we have enough hindsight now to ensure we don’t make the same mistakes moving forward. The time to regulate unlawful AI training is now, and we must learn from mistakes past to ensure that we provide effective deterrents and consequences to such ubiquitous law breaking in the future.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] haverholm@kbin.earth 22 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, the only threat to Big Tech is that they might sink a lot of money into training material they'd have to give away later. But releasing the material into the Public Domain is not exactly an improvement for the people whose data and work has been used without consent or payment.

"Congratulations, your rights are still being violated, but now the data is free to use for everyone".

[–] Teils13@lemmy.eco.br 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

They would actually still benefit from public-domain'ing LLMs, because they themselves also get to use the data produced by others. Everyone gets losses but also gets gains on this idea, which is much better than current model.

[–] haverholm@kbin.earth 1 points 8 hours ago

That's like saying victims of deepfake porn benefit because they get to watch themselves having sex. Nope, not buying it.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Whether rights have been violated depends on the jurisdiction, of course.

[–] haverholm@kbin.earth 2 points 3 days ago

Semantics. If person A is protected by privacy rights in her jurisdiction, but her data is scraped by project B from one where such rights conveniently aren't legally respected, A should still be able to expect some way of injunction.