this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2026
195 points (98.5% liked)

Fuck AI

5751 readers
1140 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
VerbFlow@lemmy.world
MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
TootSweet@lemmy.world
BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
cynar@lemmy.world
drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
CriticalMedicine@lemmy.world
WonderfulWanderer@lemmy.world
Communist@lemmy.ml
eatCasserole@lemmy.world
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
NutWrench@lemmy.world
Soup@lemmy.cafe
iAvicenna@lemmy.world
Tinks@lemmy.world
wizblizz@lemmy.world
corus_kt@lemmy.world
TrickDacy@lemmy.world
andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
MeDuViNoX@sh.itjust.works
33550336@lemmy.world
Nougat@fedia.io
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
Quill7513@slrpnk.net
glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz
e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de
ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social
195
AIs can generate near-verbatim copies of novels from training data (arstechnica.com)
submitted 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) by supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
38 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

AI and legal experts told the FT this “memorization” ability could have serious ramifications on AI groups’ battle against dozens of copyright lawsuits around the world, as it undermines their core defense that LLMs “learn” from copyrighted works but do not store copies.

Sam Altman would like to remind you each Old Lady at a Library consume 284 cubic feet of Oxygen a day from the air.

Also, hey at least they made sure to probably destroy the physical copy they ripped into their hopelessly fragmented CorpoNapster fever dream, the law is the law.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] KnitWit@lemmy.world 49 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Exactly. Saw a poster on here the other day defending it, saying its a new way to search. We’re really boiling the planet and hoarding all computer components for years for search?

[–] Klox@lemmy.world 54 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

It's worse than search because it strips original context and invents new (often incorrect) context around whatever it is copy/pasting.

[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 27 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, well. Have you considered how much money it’s making for about 20 people??

[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I'd pay more money to not use it.

[–] Kn1ghtDigital@lemmy.zip 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

That's how we got into this mess. Burn it down.

[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Yes, agreed. We shouldn't have to pay extra to have products not be annoying the fuck out of us. On principle, I wouldn't pay them for it, but I want it all gone so badly--ai assistants, ads for shows and music, all of it. Fuck them for making our experiences shitty for their profit.

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 2 points 6 hours ago

Yeah. Then it destroys traditional search engines by overrunning them with slop