Sir Arthur V Quackington

Ingesting all the artwork you ever created by obtaining it illegally and feeding it into my plagarism remix machine is theft of your work, because I did not pay for it.

Separately, keeping a copy of this work so I can do this repeatedly is also stealing your work.

The judge ruled the first was okay but the second was not because the first is “transformative”, which sadly means to me that the judge despite best efforts does not understand how a weighted matrix of tokens works and that while they may have some prevention steps in place now, early models showed the tech for what it was as it regurgitated text with only minor differences in word choice here and there.

Current models have layers on top to try and prevent this user input, but escaping those safeguards is common, and it’s also only masking the fact that the entire model is built off of the theft of other’s work.

There is nothing intelligent about “AI” as we call it. It parrots based on probability. If you remove the randomness value from the model, it parrots the same thing every time based on it’s weights, and if the weights were trained on Harry Potter, it will consistently give you giant chunks of harry potter verbatim when prompted.

Most of the LLM services attempt to avoid this by adding arbitrary randomness values to churn the soup. But this is also inherently part of the cause of hallucinations, as the model cannot preserve a single correct response as always the right way to respond to a certain query.

LLMs are insanely “dumb”, they’re just lightspeed parrots. The fact that Meta and these other giant tech companies claim it’s not theft because they sprinkle in some randomness is just obscuring the reality and the fact that their models are derivative of the work of organizations like the BBC and Wikipedia, while also dependent on the works of tens of thousands of authors to develop their corpus of language.

In short, there was a ethical way to train these models. But that would have been slower. And the court just basically gave them a pass on theft. Facebook would have been entirely in the clear had it not stored the books in a dataset, which in itself is insane.

I wish I knew when I was younger that stealing is wrong, unless you steal at scale. Then it’s just clever business.

Terrible judgement.

Turn the K value down on the model and it reproduces text near verbatim.

I’m not worried about me. I can manage. But I had to intervene and make it a Project for my immediate family. Which is always unfun, because who wants to expose all their personal data that way, especially photos.

Crazy that Google just screwed over GrapheneOS like this.

Yes, but that shouldn’t explicitly opt in, and they shouldn’t marry that product to Gmail and Google Drive if they are going to push it to enable by default.

Again, it’s really insidious. They push it so aggressively I had to disable it on my personal device twice, and I can’t just not use Google Photos app because it’s tied to the camera itself on pixel phones.

The absolutely criminal dark patterns that they pull on people via Google photos auto backup is insane.

Just in my own orbit 2 of my friends wives, my parents, and my in-laws all wound up paying Google because they thought they had to or lose all their photos. We helped most of them disconnect the autobackup (that they didn’t even know was activated) and move it to offline safely. But that was the most downright evil shit Google has ever done and literally a fire in me for manipulating the elderly and less tech savvy so blatantly.

I love that Nintendo let’s me pay them separately for this.

I hope the next launch we pay for the charger and controllers separately as well. They put in so much effort after all.

True, in a broad sense. I am speaking moreso to enshittification and the degradation of both experience and control.

If this was just “now everything has Siri, it’s private and it works 100x better than before” it would be amazing. That would be like cars vs horses. A change, but a perceived value and advantage.

But it’s not. Not right now anyways. Right now it’s like replacing a car with a pod that runs on direct wind. If there is any wind over say, 3mph it works, and steers 95% as well as existing cars. But 5% of the time it’s uncontrollable and the steering or brakes won’t respond. And when there is no wind over 3mph it just doesn’t work.

In this hypothetical, the product is a clear innovation, offers potential benefits long term in terms of emissions and fuel, but it doesn’t do the core task well, and sometimes it just fucks it up.

The television, cars, social media, all fulfilled a very real niche. But nearly everyone using AI, even those using it as a tool for coding (arguably its best use case) often don’t want to use it in search or in many of these other “forced” applications because of how unreliable it is. Hence why companies have tried (and failed at great expense) to replace their customer service teams with LLMs.

This push is much more top down.

Now drink your New Coke and Crystal Pepsi.

Tech companies don’t really give a damn what customers want anymore. They have decided this is the path of the future because it gives them the most control of your data, your purchasing habits and your online behavior. Since they control the back end, the software, the tech stack, the hardware, all of it, they just decided this is how it shall be. And frankly, there’s nothing you can do to resist it, aside from just eschewing using a phone at all. and divorcing yourself from all modern technology, which isn’t really reasonable for most people. That or legislation, but LOL United States.

Bring nothing for them, admit nothing. Consult a lawyer for a few hundred to get advice.

Depending on the size of the company and severity of the information in question, you just need to say very noncommital and very specific phrases (lawyer speak):

I understand your concerns, however I think there has been a misunderstanding. How can I help resolve your concerns?

Again consult a lawyer. And tread the fine line between being contrite and admitting anything. Even in my advice I almost worded it wrong. See a lawyer. You admit nothing concrete because your admissions become fact, give them nothing without a lawyer, because even if you truly did give them the only PC and USB stick with it on it, acknowledge nothing directly (again this becomes admission in a legal sense). Whatever evidence they have right now, it is on them to prove intent unless you do it for them. And they don’t want to spend on legal fees for no reason.

In the end you want them to have the feeling that this was truly a misunderstanding while giving no admissions to concrete actions like copying, moving, or replicating any data. They may have records, but that’s a different matter.

It may be that a lawyer could just act as an intermediary to clarify, and ask what evidence they might need to feel assured in the safety of their IP. Note: most documents produced while at an employer are technically company IP in most cases, and you aren’t alone wanting to reference your own code work, but many companies are paranoid about this for good reason.

Try not to lose your nerve. You just need to plant your feet, and keep in mind you have done nothing wrong morally. You have fucked up technically, but your mission now is to keep their trust in your somehow without digging your hole any deeper. So again, speak with a lawyer and get the right language.

The company does not want to waste money suing you. So don’t hand them an obvious violation that have to pursue. Try to keep it together. Remember your intent. And convey that, as obliquely and in indirect statements as you can.

I don’t want any issues with XXXX corp, and always planned to have a good reference from my time here. The files XXX Corp is concerned with today hold no value to me, only my personal photos and data do. If you could acknowledge there’s been no wrongdoing I think we can easily resolve all this.

Avoid the temptation to let them set the terms too much. They will ask for devices and hardware. What you want is a document clearing you of any wrongdoing before you provide anything that could be used against you. Then handing things over might be okay. Again. Speak to a lawyer, even briefly.

Did you follow a guide, or know one you could link? I’m thinking this is the path for me and my friends too.

I’ve heard Joplin is good. Also Obsidian is apparently amazing with plug-ins. I’m leaning towards Obsidian myself. But between Google and MS, I figured Keep and Evernote would’ve been impossible to challenge.

It’s official: note taking app with 0 advantages over just plain ass notes synced via cloud signs death warrant.

For real, FOSS software that saves to a file folder and does all of this exists. They are just chasing us into their arms.