Data is incredibly valuable, OpenAI and Facebook have proven that. Ever bigger models require ever more data. And we live in a capitalist world, so if something is valuable, like data, you typically have to pay for it. So open source AI shouldn't be a thing.

Also, OpenAI is hardly open source anymore. They no longer disclose their data sources, data harvesting, data methodologies, nor release their training code. They also don't release their trained models anymore.

If they were truly open source, I could see maybe defending them, but at the moment all I see is a company violating data privacy and licences to get incredibly rich.

What good thing is OpenAI doing exactly? I have yet to see any of their technologies being used for any sort of societal good. So far the only thing I have seen is cheating on homeworks and exams, faking legal documents, and serving as a dungeon master for D&D. The last one is kind of cool, but the first two are illegal.

Additionally, if you work in any kind of serious research division at a FAANG, you'd know there is a collective suspicion of OpenAI's work, as their recent papers (or lack thereof for ChatGPT) no longer describe the exact and specific data they used (beyond saying The Internet) and they no longer release their training code, making independent peer review and verification impossible, and causing many to question if their data is legally obtained. At any FAANG, you need to rope Legal into any discussion about data sources long before you begin training, and most data you see on the internet isn't actually usable unless there is an explicit licence allowing it, so a lot of data is off limits, but OpenAI seems to ignore that, hence they never discuss their data specifics anymore.

We live in a world of laws and multiple social contracts, you can't just do as you feel. Hopefully OpenAI is punished and restricted accordingly, and starts playing by the same rules as everyone else in the industry. Fanboys such as yourself aren't helpful to the progress of responsible, legal, and ethical AI research.

I agree, hence I support this lawsuit and hope that Getty wins, which I hope leads to some laws vastly curtailing which data AI can be trained on, especially when that data comes from artists/creators, who are already some of the lowest paid members of society (unless they're the lucky 0.01% of that group).

As it should be. If openness of internet means a few people become rich off the back of training on large swathes of data without explicit permission, then it should be stopped.

OpenAI should pay for their own labelled datasets, not harvest from the internet without explicit permission, to then sell back as GPT3 and get rich off of. This absolutely has to be punished and stopped.

I personally don't care a whit about Stable Diffusion. AI should be going after rote, boring tasks via automation, not creativity and art. That's the one thing actually enjoyable about life, and the last thing we should be automating with stupid models that are just scaled matrix multiplication.

Good, hopefully Getty wins.