I was reading about how Anthropic has settled a copyright case for 1.5 billion dollars after it used a database of pirated books to train Claude AI. For instance, a Finnish author whose book was in the set will get about 3,000€ out of the settlement. However, I believe that this proves the usecase for blockchain copyrighting, where "proof of origin" can be proven immutably.
I also think it raises the case for micropayments to original authors of any content that is discovered by searches or is used to train AI or to provide any kind of AI-generated response. While the AI companies can own the algorithms and infrastructure, the content they are generating is not theirs, and is derived by normal people globally.
This also raises another possibility, where people who use AI to generate content that they earn from, will also be subjected to micro pay original authors whose work went into the AI amalgamation. Because even if the outcome of the work is original to the AI, what went into creating it isn't. And this is more than an artist who gets inspired by the work of another, because there is no inspiration in the AI, there is no work done by the AI or the content creator prompting it, it is just an algorithm that delivers a predictable result, even if not predictable to the human observer.
Artificial Intelligence is going to decimate almost every industry that is currently in existence, as it will increasingly and rapidly encroach deeper and deeper into all human domains, replacing not only human thought, but human action also. AI will be able to design machines that replicate our movements and program the machines to think enough like us to be consistently better, with improving accuracy all of the time and at some point, we will not be able to add value of any kind.
As I was saying to someone the other day, even in "safe" fields like electrical and plumbing, a large part of what makes them safe is the inconsistencies in standardisation. Once standards have complete compliance, it will be only non-compliant systems that will need human intervention, and these will decrease as they are brought up to standard.
If earning has to be part of the human ecosystem and we can assume for a little while at least that it will, it means that we are going to have to find new ways to earn, and those who have created in the past something that is still getting used, should get royalties from it. AI companies shouldn't be able to earn based on the content they have stolen and that content gap of earning should be pushed back to the original creators. And a creator earning from the AI creation, should be able to earn on their ideas for content, but should have to factor in remuneration for original authors too.
This seems like an impossible task, but it is not, because we have the technology to not only store the required information, but also track and retrieve all of the information required in order to distribute earnings fairly. And not only would this improve the distribution of equity in content, but it will also improve the information sources themselves, and be able to feed a web of trust directly to validate all kinds of data, from content to event, so that a reliability confidence score can be applied.
While I am not a huge fan of all this data driving our lives, it isn't going to change at scale because it comes with a massive amount of value and convenience as well. As much as I don't like it in many respects, I still benefit from ease of use and information availability, so we should be designing the information ecosystem to work for our wellbeing, not against it.
Wellbeing should be the focus of everything we do as a society, and business activity should be looking to maximise our wellbeing - and in so doing, maximise profits. And this is where the ability to measure impact really matters, because if we are only looking at corporate metrics as success factors, we are going to miss the damage done to humanity to reach those same numbers. We need to look at betterment for humanity first, and then see what activity leads to improving it further - and monetise that. As the activities change, so do the incentives.
But to do this requires a lot of data and processing power, which means that the AI companies will stull be earning from providing infrastructure and improved algorithms that help us make better decisions, and act on them.
Ultimately, the only measurements that matter are those that lead to improving humanity and can be used to keep us advancing, keep us growing, keep us innovating, and evolving ourselves for the better. AI definitely can play a massive role in this journey, not as a content creator, but a facilitation tool that helps us build the systems required. The trouble is, if monetary profit is the only focus, the tools are not used for wellbeing improvement, because with the society we have currently established, there isn't enough money in it.
I wonder if any of my content has been used to train an AI.
Can I find out and if it has, should I be compensated?
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Be part of the Hive discussion.
- Comment on the topics of the article, and add your perspectives and experiences.
- Read and discuss with others who comment and build your personal network
- Engage well with me and others and put in effort
And you may be rewarded.
There's a website (think it's have I been trained or something like that, I remember it being similar to have I been pwned) where you can check to see if they stole your art but I don't know about writing.
Would AI companies go out of business if they were forced to identify and compensate everyone whose data they trained on without permission?
If the business model can't profit without theft, should it be able to continue trading?
Sometimes I feel like a lot of business models couldn't profit without theft.
The simplistic answer is "no" and with that the entire economy collapses within 10 seconds XD
Nice title for the post. I actually just saw Lionel Richie in concert on Friday night. He sang Say You Say Me. I think a lot of it will have to do with the problem solving capabilities of these robots or whatever. In a lot of old houses things weren't always done to code, so you often have to pivot once you get in there and start working. That might allow humans to hold off plumbing or electrical robots at least for a little bit.
Awesome. Was it a good concert?
Exactly, but it will become more and more up to code as repairs happen and all new homes will be built standardised. I still don't know why electrical work isn't far more plug and play.
It was excellent. I'll be writing a post about it later this week or next week for sure. I wish everything was standardized. It seems some people always have to go off the rails though. It's scary the number of things that are cobbled together in my current home.
Nice. I like seeing those old timers perform from more my era. The music is simpler but usually tells a better story.
Yes, it is usually more about the music and less about the production, though some of them keep going long after they should have called it quits!
I don't think there is any software developed regarding this. However, maybe, if you copy-paste your content on some paid plagiarism site, it may lead toward it. And surely, you and everyone else should be compensated for the genuine content. Although, the AI world has taken over majority of the fields, but still, human mind possesses the ability to go wild. It, still, has the power to think out of the box, to generate something out of nothing.
But, when it comes to profit other than themselves, the companies come up with some sort of moral values, such as we are using this data for the wellbeing of humanity.
Fine. Prove it.
And that is why the metrics of wellbeing need to be tracked. Not the ones that favour profits, the ones that favour people.
Our contents is on the web and the ia
Ia have been tracking all the web maybe yes we need to receiv3d paid for our contents the probem is the big enterprices never give to the creators the money that they earn an example remember the history of the man who invent the diesel motor he never received a payment for his invention.
He was killing by the industry.
And they will keep getting away with it for as long as they can - unless we stop them by changing the rules.
I wonder if it will be possible to sue the AI companies in the future, or if they are going to concentrate power and influence to the point where they became untouchable...
They are trying it now, aren't they?
I suspect that there will be more class actions and settlements. But that is a silly way to do it. Equity distribution should be baked into the process at the start.
It is incredibly hard to know for sure if a company used our data because most AI training datasets are kept behind a closed curtain. Your best bet is to look up the privacy policy of the specific platform you used to see if they automatically opt everyone into data collection for training.
From there, you usually have to dig into your account settings to manually turn off data sharing or submit a formal "opt-out" request to protect your digital footprint. (Asked this from Gemini)
Should change, right? Someone should know.
It should be, our Data should be safe until we want to share with them.
Of course someone should know how to check.
It should be, our Data should be safe until we want to share with them.
Of course someone should know how to check.
Congratulations @tarazkp! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 7700 posts.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPI think that blockchain technology has the potential to revolutionize how we prove the origin of things and make sure that content usage is transparent.
that's a good lionel richie song..
Say you, Say me..
yes, i agree that credit should be tracked and payment made.
All the beauty, pleasure, happiness and well-being that we desire have a price Yo pay. Everything has a price. Pay you, pay me, can apply to those who take someone's copyright. And copyright should be protected by legal rules. The sentence of prosperity Will be obtained when we feel comfortable that individual rights are fulfilled. My opinion. Thank you.