Meta has enabled a setting that allows anyone to use your public Instagram photos to create AI-generated images of you unless you opt out.
To opt out, click your profile -> 3 bars in the top right -> scroll down to "Sharing and reuse" and toggle off for both Posts and for Reels.
If the Australian Government accedes to Anthropic's demands and creates a copyright exception for AI training, the British Government should file a dispute at the WTO.
Because Australia wouldn’t just be legalising the theft of their own creatives’ work. They would be making it legal to steal the work of creatives from around the world, as long as the GPUs used for the thieving are on Australian soil.
The international Berne Convention dictates that any copyright exceptions must (i) be confined to certain special cases, (ii) not conflict with the normal exploitation of the works that are copied, and (iii) not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. There is no way a broad copyright exception allowing AI training on copyrighted works would be permitted under this agreement.
Even the US has nothing like this. Fair use is not a broad exception - which is exactly why there are 100+ outstanding lawsuits on the subject of copyright and AI there.
Governments should protect their citizens. If the Australian government legalises the theft of British work, it is imperative that the British government stand up for its creatives. Going through the WTO is essentially the only way to do this.
UK government's promise that Scottish AI data center would be powered 100% by renewable energy turns out to be “smoke and mirrors”.
This is also the site the government promised would provide 3,400 jobs, a number that the simplest analysis suggests is a wild overestimate.
AI data centers benefit AI companies, not local people.
https://t.co/igr3el5CgO
Here's my full interview with CNBC, covering my bear case against generative AI, OpenAI's questionable finances, AI's lack of ROI, and how all of this is a symptom of the tech industry running out of hypergrowth ideas.
It's great to see the mainstream media discussing this.
🚨 Google continues to lobby the UK government to hand the work of the country's creatives to big tech companies for free.
And it does so by misrepresenting US copyright law, suggesting companies can simply train AI models in the US (where in fact, far from AI training simply being legal, there are 100+ lawsuits currently going through the courts).
The UK government should continue to resist this brazen demand for a handout of artists' work to the most powerful companies in the world.
https://t.co/YYHCq18V1l
there is literally nothing wrong with customers knowing the extent of generative AI used in the development of a game they are considering purchasing.
people don't like GenAI and want quality games made by humans.
adapt or get left behind Tim
In good faith but also kind of rhetorical question, why does AI disclosure make it harder to sell a game, Tim?
I don't think full 100% business disclosure is necessary, but if simply saying what's inside of a product makes it harder to sell then why is the solution to hide it?