this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

42270 readers
819 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I know what the Creative Commons is but not this new thing or why it keeps popping up in comments on Lemmy

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because people don't understand how copyright works.

In most countries any copyrightable work that you produce is automatically covered by copyright. You don't need to do anything additional to gain that protection.

Most Lemmy instances don't have any sort of licensing grant in their terms of service. So that means that the original author maintains all ownership of their work.

So technically what these people are doing is granting a license to their comment that allows it to be used for more than would otherwise be allowed by the default copyright protections.

What they are probably trying to accomplish is to revoke the ability for commercial enterprises to use their comments. However that is already the default state so it is pretty irrelevant. Basically any company that cares about copyright and thinks that what they are doing isn't allowed as fair use already wouldn't be able to use their comments without the license note. So by adding the license note all they are doing is allowing non-commercial AI to scrape it (which is probably not what was intended). Of course most AI scraping companies don't care about copyright or think that their use is not protected under copyright. So it is again irrelevant.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ding ding ding. It’s basically the equivalent of that “I don’t give Facebook permission to use my statuses, pictures, etc for commercial purposes…” chain letter that boomers love to post. It has enough fancy legalese and sounds juuuust plausible enough that it’ll get anyone who doesn’t already understand the law.

[–] iegod@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

It reads like a sovcit claim.

[–] april@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It's meaningless bullshit if they think the AI companies give a shit about copyright

Even moreso: When you post online you typically give the website a license to distribute the content in the terms and conditions. That's all the license they need, it doesn't matter what you say in the comments.

[–] Thavron@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah just adding a link to your comment doesn't negate the TOS of where you post it.

~~ Hey you can't use my ramblings!!! ~~

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah just adding a link to your comment doesn’t negate the TOS of where you post it.

Is that in Lemmy World’s terms though?

Edit: Wow, you went back later and added that link to the YouTube video. So weird how people get trigged by this. /shakeshead

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Even moreso: When you post online you typically give the website a license to distribute the content in the terms and conditions. That’s all the license they need, it doesn’t matter what you say in the comments.

Is that in Lemmy World’s terms?

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 year ago

You'd have to check with that instance, but IIRC they don't have any license on your content, meaning your content effectively falls under copyright unless states otherwise.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's the internet equivalent of a sovereign citizen putting a fake license plate on their car.

The ones they're trying to "protect themselves" from do not give a shit.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

By reading this comment you have entered in to a binding agreement to pay me $1000 per word.

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENT!

[–] macarthur_park@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am not reading your comment, I am simply traveling through it with my eyeballs. Also your comment doesn’t have gold fringe and therefore lacks jurisdiction.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

For God's sake, it's not even all caps in 45 degree angle...

[–] csm10495@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

2 bucks says commercial ai is still being trained on those comments.

[–] sushibowl@feddit.nl 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It would be pretty funny if GPT starts putting licence notices under its answers because that's what people do in its training data.

[–] hsr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Until now I was under the impression that this was the goal of these notices:

If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

Because if an LLM ingests a comment with a copyright notice like that, there's a chance it will start appending copyright notices to it's own responses, which could technically, legally, maybe make the AI model CC BY-NC-SA 4.0? A way to "poison" the dataset, so that OpenAI is obliged to distribute it's model under that license. Obviously there's no chance of that working, but it draws attention to AI companies breaking copyright law.

(also, I have no clue about copyrights)

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Your first mistake was thinking the company training their models care. They're actively lobbying for the right to say "fuck copyright when it benefits us!".

Your second mistake is assuming training LLM blindly put everything in. There's human filters, then there's automated filters, then there's the LLM itself that blur things out. I can't tell about the last one, but the first two will easily strip such easy noise, the same way search engines very quickly became immune to random keyword spam two decades ago.

Note that I didn't even care to see if it was useful in any way to add these little extra blurb, legally speaking. I doubt it would help, though. Service ToS and other regulatory body have probably more weight than that.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)