What if the robots want paid?

Interesting. So then we can suppose that if you had enough of these humanoids walking around, they could gather data and feed it back into a "hive mind" (as much as I hate that saying), and retrain the software running the humanoid with that new data, basically giving it a chance to "learn".

I see many hardware limitations with this possibility, but it's an interesting thought.

Perhaps another interesting thought based off of yours is, how much brand new data in our surroundings (that's not already trained on the internet) do you suppose exists in the world?

No one at Walmart lost their jobs because of self checkout. They were moved to other areas, mainly online grocery shopping.

Is that gpt 4?

Go ask Vanilla Ice what happens when your music sounds a little too close to the original.

OpenAI, and Microsoft, are 100% violating terms of use for the vast majority of the stuff they scraped.

[removed]

One issue is that LLM's cannot actively learn from their surroundings, they need to be trained prior to use. This is very different to how human brains work

[removed]

I agree, this is the point (at this point of time) - not leaving people stranded, and not screwing over people in the countryside.

Genetics and nutrition are the key, many smaller nations have high average heights

Look there are endocrine disruptors around us, but the radiation that is produced by our mobile devices is non-ionizing. This means that it cannot destroy our dna. The real reason people aren't having children is not because they do not want to, many studies show most people want children, but because it is very expensive to have children. In our capitalist society, children do not act like free labor, they are a burden. Many people want children but their career and the cost of living get in the way. Younger people also don't want to have children as much because we live in an uncertain world where many people don't want to bring children into the world.

Is this really news? People have been trendy AF since the dawn of time.

A station per 60 km is actually nonsense, the grid supports that and it's woefully inadequate.

Population has to be considered. In a space of 60 km, you can have 1 000 000 people easily enough - and 1 charging station is a joke to them. :o

(Writing this from Estonia, in the most densely populated district of Tallinn, we have maybe 6 public charging sockets and something like 50 000 people. A total rebuild of the infrastructure is required. No amount of expensive CCS or ChaDemo stations will solve the problem. It has to be something primitive and cheap deployed in large numbers: either Type 1 or Type 2, and the price tag has to be reasonable enough to fill entire streets with them.)

Denmark, Netherlands and I think Serbia have some of the highest average heights in the world. It's nothing to do with the size of the nation, it's genetics and nutrition.

I mean yeah I agree, enforcing something like this is going to be very very difficult. But there are several clear examples of something like DallE generating images very similar to or nearly identical to copyrighted IP.

IANAL, but I presume a claimant could be able to establish some reasonable certainty to a court that licensed works were used in a way that breaks the license, at which point OpenAI (or really any AI company) would be responsible for defending their practice or non-use of those licensed works

Quality of Life has to be extended as well, otherwise you exasperate the problem by having more people unable to contribute to the system. But even with that it boils down to the problem of telling people that the light at the end of the tunnel is getting further away.

The following submission statement was provided by /u/No_Goose2198:

Submission statement

The tech ethics organization Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP) has asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate OpenAI for violating consumer protection regulations. CAIDP alleges that OpenAI's AI text generation tools are "biased, deceptive, and dangerous to public safety."

CAIDP's complaint raises concerns about the potential threat of OpenAI's GPT-4 generated text model, which was announced in mid-March. It warns of the potential for GPT-4 to generate malware and highly personalized propaganda, and the risk that biased training data could lead to ingrained stereotypes or unfair racial and gender preferences in employment.

The complaint also cites significant privacy failures in the OpenAI product interface, such as a recent bug that exposed OpenAI ChatGPT records and potentially ChatGPT and subscribers' payment details.

CAIDP seeks to hold OpenAI liable for violating Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair and deceptive trade practices. The complaint alleges that OpenAI knowingly released GPT-4 to the public for commercial use despite the risks, including potential bias and harmful behavior.

CAIDP is a European Union AI Policy Advisor, the organization that supports the Council of the European Union in establishing an AI legal framework, U.S. Congressional AI Policy Statement, Member of the U.S. AI National Strategy Advisory Committee, OECD and G20 Policy advisors.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/126sfnq/caidp_asks_ftc_to_halt_release_of_openais_new_gpt/jeajw2n/

Roko's basilisk is gonna fuck these people up!

No doubt those licensing were ignored but without evidence how do you make that copyright claim? Without evidence does that make it derivative? What do you think?

You're right. I'm talking out of my ass.

The real question is why does the birthrate drop! Is it because of the poison in our foods and water? Is it because of the radiation from mobile phones near your private parts? its definitely by design.

But that's not what this post is about at all? What?

Just because something is free to access, doesn’t mean you are allowed to remember it or learn from it any way!!

ShareGPT open web resource...

So this "open web" thing is just a name? WTF does open means?

Just because something is free to access doesn't mean you have the right to do whatever you want with it, especially with regards to making derivative works without attribution or otherwise breaking license terms. This is what licenses and copyrights are for.

For example, if OpenAI scraped a code repository that uses a Creative Commons NonCommercial license and is using that code for monetary gain without the owner's consent, they're breaking that license. It'd have to be argued whether the fact that OpenAI used that code to train their models which may generate code to similar likeness counts as distributing the source, and whether having a user use that model under a paid service counts as a commercial violation of those terms.

The algorithm is IP, yes. But GPT-X is part model part training data.