I feel disgusting saying this, but until #CreativeCommons gets their heads out of their asses or the "AI" bubble finally bursts, ALL of my #art assets, visual, audio or otherwise, will have to be copyrighted with all rights reserved. As far as I can tell, GPL and its derivatives are strictly designed for code, as well as the BSD, MIT and all other #OpenSource or #copyleft licenses. If I'm wrong, I will consider those.
#Commons#AI#GenerativeAI#Chatbots#Copyleft#Google#Search: "Ostrom described how commons can be wisely managed, over very long timescales, by communities that self-governed. Part of her work concerns how users of a commons must have the ability to exclude bad actors from their shared resources.
When that breaks down, commons can fail – because there's always someone who thinks it's fine to shit in the well rather than walk 100 yards to the outhouse.
Enshittification is the process by which control over the internet moved from self-governance by members of the commons to acts of wanton destruction committed by despicable, greedy assholes who shit in the well over and over again.
It's not just the spammers who take advantage of Google's lazy incompetence, either. Take "copyleft trolls," who post images using outdated Creative Commons licenses that allow them to terminate the CC license if a user makes minor errors in attributing the images they use:" https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/09/shitting-in-the-well/#advon
Has anyone put any thought into how to protect your personal blog from the generative ai scrapers? I've already blocked openai in robots.txt, but it seems like more and more small #generativeAI providers are popping up who don't honor these requests?
Maybe a noise filters artists are using with invisible characters but then again how do I make sure Google bot can see my posts? I don't care about humans using my work but I take issue with machines
@Zauberfrau viele grundlegende Thesen darin werden, wie der deutsche Informatiker Wolfgang Ertl über die Analyse seiner US Kollegin Elaine Rich schreibt, auch 2050 "immer noch aktuell" sein, andere werden helfen zu verstehen, wie wir dahin kamen wo wir sein werden (ich mit viel Glück und #ProjektMyra als phantastischer #Weltenbau sicherlich auch noch). Lohnt sich. Und ist #OpenSciece - die Papier Version kostet, das #EBook kann man legal kostenlos laden. Lesen! @bookstodon@buchstodon
Und wo finde ich das legale kostenlose Ebook zum Laden? Ich finde nur leider Bezahlversionen, die sogar noch teurer als die Papierversion sind.
Ist es vielleicht nur für Institutionen kostenlos?
MongoDB's SSPL (Server Side Public License) sounds like an extremely strong copyleft form of free software license. It sounds like MongoDB took the AGPL and made it much stronger.
Respected "open source" groups have rejected MongoDB's copyleft open source free software license, such as the OSI, RedHat, and Debian.
The criticism of the SSPL do not seem to recognize that it is a copyleft free software license. Is the OSI really a protector of copyleft free software? The politics of these organizations seem to leaning anarcho-capitalist "libertarian".
I don't believe the SSPL will harm any specific field of endeavor. Databases are used in all fields of endeavor. They are usually one of many provided cloud computing services. Cloud computing services are used in most every field of endeavor these days. Even my toothbrush has a cloud database.
By rejecting the SSPL, the OSI, RedHat, Debian have appeared to have ignored the copyleft freedoms that the SSPL guarantees.
@neptune22222 SSPL is made to be viral to the degree that it in practice prohibits any commercial actor from offering a hosted instance of it.
And it’s always used together with CLA:s that gives the the copyright rights to eg. MongoDB and thus enabling MongoDB to offer a service without having to abide by the SSPL.
The SSPL isn’t made to protect freedoms. It’s made to weaponize CLA:s to ensure that the “owner” gets an advantage over everyone else.
@neptune22222 The only “open source” use case I can see for the SSPL is if used together with the Business Source License as the licensing terms for the initial period before the BSL rolls over into a GPL-compatible license.
That could be an improvement over the BSL with a custom provision.
(neo)’liberal’ licenses like MIT and BSD that enable corporations to partake of the free labour of others
implying that the #GPL / #AGPL doesn't let corps partake in the free labor of others too> and enclose the commons
Your "open commons" is worthless if it's effectively still proprietary. Case in point: #Mastodon's #ActivityPub extensions that pretty much everybody else have to support (Mastodon is AGPL, and it's not realistic to implement ActivityPub strictly to the spec and expect it to be compatible with Mastodon). Or GNUisms (implemented by #GNU software which are GPL) that #BSD userlands are forced to support. Or #Matrix where there's basically only one server implementation that is usable (#Synapse whichis AGPL). I could go on and on.
@smallcircles@mima that's a bit backwards - Mastodon built on a previous collection of composable specs called OStatus and participated in the ActivityPub standards process. They then removed most of the OStatus parts, except Webfinger which they insist on for unclear reasons.
They also used bits of AP oddly, especially the summary field.
Yes, in terms of the history and specs they used you are correct. Maybe "holes in the spec" was wrongly formulated. They created their 'flavor' of ActivityPub within its flexible bounds, integrated with other specs in ways they deemed best, and added their own bits where needed.
My point is that implementing a spec doesn't give a FOSS project a duty to maintain it. It's prudent to spend time on healthy spec + ecosystem evolution, and can be a win-win. It's not a requirement.
If you see the AGPL licenses on my free and open source work and you think “damn you, I can’t use this to enrich myself or my corporation without sharing back what I’ve built on top of what you’ve freely shared and thus contribute to cultivating a healthy commons where others might enjoy the same benefits from my work that I want to obtain from yours” (a) you really have long-winded thoughts and (b) well, you already see the flaw in your reasoning.
(Remember this whenever anyone complains about ‘the viral nature of GPL’ or sings praises for (neo)’liberal’ licenses like MIT and BSD that enable corporations to partake of the free labour of others and enclose the commons.)
@aral Legal at work only just seems to have noticed that we're not allowed to steal OSS and so they're on a mission to purge all references to AGPL libraries.
I'm in a team where we've never been much for outside libraries but have also never had active intrusion by way of security scans and Git repo monitoring. It's turning into a huge pain in the ass to prove we're essentially compliant by default.
Yeah, you're really gonna see which companies are just gonna allow the AI to scrape all their stuff now. I'm a copyleft/creative commons kinda guy. But if you have art that you don't want stolen, the answer is simple.
MAKE YOUR OWN WEBSITE and put your art there (edit: and use that Glaze type of stuff on your art that wrecks AI, just to be sure)! Neocities is SO easy to set up! Or your own domain and hosting via porkbun, GoDaddy (non-WordPress) - anything at all other than proprietary/walled stuff!
Use strong copyleft licenses for your software, please. When you use permissive licenses like MIT or BSD (2 or 3 clause), you're essentially giving up the premise that free software should remain free.
The fact that silicon valley tech companies avoid using software with strong copyleft licensing is an argument for, not against them.
15.02.2024, 11:00–17:00
Ventilator Bar (OT301, Amsterdam)
Free / on donation (~10€)
Next week, Thursday 15th Feb, I'm giving a small workshop about licenses and alternative copyright statements in collab with Spookstad, an experimental publishing platform focused on radical politics. We will dive into the incredibly messed-up world of copyright alternatives, from forgotten underground publishing trivia to FLOSS and the more recent post-open source/post-free culture practices. Then in the afternoon we make zines.
> Dans le cadre de la collection C’était Mieux Demain, nous organisons un nouvel appel à textes ! Pour rappel, cette collection est composée de recueils de nouvelles d’anticipation se voulant optimistes quant à l’avenir, mais sans pour autant se voiler la face sur les problématiques sociales et climatiques que nous traversons.
This is interesting: Nightshade is a tool artists can use that will poison image-generating machine learning models. I lean far toward the copyleft / open culture side of intellectual property--I want people to steal my stuff!--but, I guess, because I have other issues with machine learning models in the art space I tend to like this guerrilla hack artists can use to poison the machine learning training data well. Thoughts? https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/10/23/1082189/data-poisoning-artists-fight-generative-ai/@nina love to know your thoughts? #Art#CopyLeft
@pascaline@nina Hm, interesting. I haven't looked into using either tool. Interesting reading about Glaze and its intent to confound machine learning models from copying an artist's style. I'm still not sure how I feel about machine learning models scraping data from the internet.
Interesting development. I think its objective is very silly, but it is fascinating to witness these strategies in the rapid development of an AI art ecosystem. Like watching diseases evolve alongside multicellular organisms.