Investigators recovered two stolen trailers carrying $1.3 million in data center supplies, including copper wire and infrastructure equipment.
Investigators recovered two stolen trailers carrying $1.3 million in data center supplies, including copper wire and infrastructure equipment.
LLMs are built on theft of intellectual property and copyrighted products by capital managers who hoard wealth propped up on stolen wages and exploitation, look in the mirror before you yap on about selective application of morals.
So absolutely none of that has anything to do with people stealing copper from AI data center construction sites.
You can do all the moral finger-pointing you want. The moment you start selectively deciding who is and isn’t a thief is the moment the justice system starts breaking down. You don’t get to decide who can and cannot commit crimes. We already have enough of that in our American political system, considering who our president is.
To address your other point, no copyright infringement has been found to have occurred in the training of flagship AI models. If you’d like to debate that, that’s fine, but I don’t really feel like arguing about it because we’re talking about the morality of theft, which you apparently view as something that exists on a selective gradient. Good for you, sir. Go play Robin Hood in your own neighborhood.
Wealth inequality is one of the worst and most pressing issues in the world today. There is nothing I consider more damaging than the growing wealth gap, especially in America. You’re absolutely right about that. But once again, it has absolutely nothing to do with construction materials being stolen from AI data center construction sites.
You don’t think AI eliminating vast swaths of jobs and exasperating the wealth inequality that’s starving the economy has anything to do with an increase in poor and desperate people willing to resort to crime to surive? You do realise that data centers and AI are directly dependent, yes? That conclusion is just burying your head in the sand. Let’s not forget who started the moral finger wagging here, pointing to one crime while blinding themselves to another for whatever the irrational reasoning is. Like this particular crime is just happening in a vacuum, and AI isn’t infiltrating every aspect of society by design. What’s it like to be that selective?
“no copyright infringement has been found to have occurred in the training of flagship AI models” I’m just not going to engage with this level of disingenuous assertion, you’re either deluded or you’re a liar.
Okay, I’ll address this briefly.
When a human artist paints a painting and sells it, does the estate of Michelangelo receive royalties because that artist was inspired by his work?
The reason you believe LLM training is copyright infringement is that you fundamentally misunderstand how the technology works. That’s a common theme on this platform among people who oppose AI. Many dislike it because it’s become the popular position, not because they understand how these models actually function.
When an AI generates something, it creates a novel output in response to a prompt. It is producing something new, not copying existing works verbatim. Copyright infringement generally requires copying protected expression, and simply learning patterns from publicly available data is not the same thing.
Moreover, you can’t have it both ways. If information is publicly available, then it is available to be read, analyzed, and learned from. Either it’s public, or it isn’t.
More importantly, none of this was the point of my original comment. I’m only addressing it because you clearly want to discuss AI.
For the record, I am completely opposed to what many companies are doing with AI data centers. I think the current trajectory is environmentally damaging, economically questionable, and, in some cases, a humanitarian concern. I’ve said this repeatedly. You’re free to believe me or not, I can’t prove my sincerity, but that has been my position throughout.
Now, would you like to discuss the actual topic of conversation, the two-faced nature of Lemmy?
You couldn’t pay me enough to waste my brain cells on your disingenuous, fart-sniffing sophistry and bad faith horseshit, so no I don’t think I will, get better please.
So basically there’s nothing you can do to refute what I’m saying because it’s all true so you resort to “nuh-uh” with a thesaurus.
It broke down long ago. You care more about copper in a techbro’s plagiarism machine than you do about all the wage theft ever.
No.
You’re stating a position that I never took. I never said I supported AI data centers. My point was about how users on Lemmy are quick to encourage criminal behavior when it targets something they dislike, while condemning the same behavior when it is directed at something they support. That’s called being two-faced.
For the record, I do not support AI data centers. They could all burn down for all I care. If every LLM shut down tomorrow, nothing in my life would change. I consider AI data centers a blight on the environment, and many communities do not want them built in their areas.
I pray to the God I don’t believe in that they don’t build one anywhere near me.
You just handwring about theft from them. But not wage theft.
For one reason.
No. I was talking about the two faced nature of this platform.
I’ve admonished data centers the entire time in this exchange. Don’t tell me what I wrote about. I know what I wrote about.
Wage theft impacts millions of actual humans and you’re whining about the rights you think a corporate owned tool of oppression has instead.
Isn’t this exactly what a jury of your peers is intended for? So people - the members of the affected community - can decide who is and isn’t a thief, after ensuring they’re provided with all the facts of the case?
No that’s not how that works at all.
At all.
And if that’s what you think or believe, I highly recommend you go back to remedial social studies class and ask a lot of questions.
Doesn’t it though? If there weren’t such rampant wealth inequality perhaps people wouldn’t be so inclined towards a life of crime. It has at least a little bit to do with it.
All right. I’ll concede that point. If there wasn’t such a massive wealth Gap. People wouldn’t have to steal like this. In this particular case you are right and they stand corrected.