• FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      “Slippery slope” is also a fallacy. Training an AI and copying a game are two different things and it’s entirely reasonable to hold the position that one is ok and the other is not.

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          I’m not missing the point. Just because they’re both “using data without consent” doesn’t mean they’re the same thing. Playing baseball and smashing someone’s car both involve swinging a bat but that’s where the similarity ends.

          There are many ways that you can “use data without consent” that are perfectly legal.

            • FaceDeer@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 years ago

              Legal does not necessarily equate to ethical.

              Of course not. But “ethical” is a matter of subjective debate. You say X is unethical, I say X is ethical, and ultimately there’s no way to tell who’s “right.”

              Law’s different, the whole point of it is to have a system that sorts these things out.

              And the law will eventually change (I think) to mitigate some of these shortcomings that AI training has highlighted.

              So it’s not currently illegal to train AIs like this? That’s been my point this whole time. It’s a different thing from the things that are currently illegal (such as “theft”).

                • FaceDeer@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  Unethical according to your personal opinion. My opinion on the ethics of the matter differ, and that’s just as valid as yours. You don’t get to declare “that’s unethical” and then expect everyone to just fall in line with your belief. Way back at the root of this you said:

                  But it’s clear a lot of people don’t understand why using data without consent is a bad thing in this context,

                  Which, as I argued back then, suggests that you think that the notion that “using data without consent” is a bad thing that people who disagree with you just don’t understand. No, they understand perfectly well. They just disagree with you.