Executives working on AI at Microsoft and OpenAI admitted what its critics have been saying all along: Large language models are predatory pieces of technology that have been built on what a Microsoft executive called “an astonishing theft of unprecedented proportions,” and the “largest theft of labor in human history.” An internal Microsoft document said generative AI products have created a “doom loop” that is killing “the entire web.”

Those statements and a series of other mask-off moments feature heavily in an unredacted court filing that was unsealed Thursday in the behemoth New York Times vs OpenAI copyright lawsuit that has been winding its way through the court system for years. In a filing asking for summary judgment (basically, a filing with the court asking it to rule), lawyers for the New York Times laid out a series of admissions made by Microsoft and OpenAI executives in documents and depositions that until now had remained either sealed or redacted at the request of Microsoft and OpenAI.

It’s easy to see why the AI companies wanted to hide this from the public. The statements, taken together, are some of the most damning indictments of the ways LLMs were trained, how they worked, and the immediate threat they pose to human labor. It is a reminder that even as AI becomes more powerful and companies try to shift the narrative to the supposed existential risk of “superintelligent” AI, the tools they have already built were created by stealing from human creativity and labor and are by definition existential threats to the human labor market.


  • rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    NGL, I was kinda hoping something would destroy the internet and we could move to Reticulum/NomadNet/I2P/Tor

    Shit’s been going downhill since 1999

    • Matty Roses@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Setting up a Reticulum node this week.

      And wondering if there’s a matrix client that can use it, or if that’s something that needs to be made . . .

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Transport isn’t the issue, but both those protocols provide low-bandwidth hosting requirements. NomadNet is straight out of the 90’s bbs territory, and I2P is slow enough on its own to preclude anything too fancy. It’s forcing us to go back to the small distributed hosting models, which I consider a good thing. They’re also resistant to censorship and, in some cases, reasonably privacy-conscious