Did you read the article? They’re using your private photos from your camera roll. It is an actual example of what I said. The part I mentioned about public photos was of previously posted photos on Facebook. Please read the article otherwise don’t ask for it.
Well, I’m replying to what you’re asking and arguing about, as you can tell if you reread our thread. I care about both privacy and intellect property. Shouldn’t be that hard to grasp. Also, you’ve just been asking questions and assuming my point of view without ever stating your own stance. Do you believe it’s fine for AI companies to use your personal data and your intellect property to train models they’ll profit from without your consent?
If you want to resort to ad hominem we can say good day and move on, that’s not the point of discussing things here. At least not for me. If you’d like to answer my question about what is contradictory about enforcing wealth taxes and protecting IP at the same time, I’m all ears.
You asserted that models are trained on private data. You were unable to back up the assertion.
I am not interested in psychological or rhetorical tricks. I see no value in it. If you’re willing to have a rational, fact-based discussion, science-style, then I am willing to assume good faith until evidence to the contrary is apparent.
The article explicitly states a model is being trained on private data.
You have avoided answering any of my questions and resorted to basically name calling. In light of it, I also see no longer any value in talking to you. Have a nice day.
Did you read the article? They’re using your private photos from your camera roll. It is an actual example of what I said. The part I mentioned about public photos was of previously posted photos on Facebook. Please read the article otherwise don’t ask for it.
Well, I’m replying to what you’re asking and arguing about, as you can tell if you reread our thread. I care about both privacy and intellect property. Shouldn’t be that hard to grasp. Also, you’ve just been asking questions and assuming my point of view without ever stating your own stance. Do you believe it’s fine for AI companies to use your personal data and your intellect property to train models they’ll profit from without your consent?
If you want to resort to ad hominem we can say good day and move on, that’s not the point of discussing things here. At least not for me. If you’d like to answer my question about what is contradictory about enforcing wealth taxes and protecting IP at the same time, I’m all ears.
You asserted that models are trained on private data. You were unable to back up the assertion.
I am not interested in psychological or rhetorical tricks. I see no value in it. If you’re willing to have a rational, fact-based discussion, science-style, then I am willing to assume good faith until evidence to the contrary is apparent.
The article explicitly states a model is being trained on private data.
You have avoided answering any of my questions and resorted to basically name calling. In light of it, I also see no longer any value in talking to you. Have a nice day.