The problem with openai's "publicly available data" argument is that publicly available does NOT equal public domain. They know it's nonsense and they desperately hope nobody's smart enough to know the difference. It's tragic, but not at all surprising that a whistleblower would "self-eliminate" out of nowhere.
@tinyshinyfeathers exactly, for some reason they don't know the difference. I just read a new article about his parents opening an investigation because they said he was a happy guy.
6:02 Btw, private investigation's conclusion doesn't really point out to a "self-liquidation" incident. So the truth seems rather shadier than the mainstream narrative.
I feel bad for him, RIP Suchir Balaji. It's possible it's more than that but like you said, holidays and depression, especially for stressed people, can go badly. Apparently a lot of people pass around this time of year for a variety of reasons. It's definitely suspicious timing but I also don't really trust Elon Musk to have a good take. I think he's got a deal with one of the other multi-billion dollar companies trying to make money off of Gen AI; I just can't remember which one it is. Elon is bad at everything and just has the rep he built up, using professional teams to do all of the hard work so he could take the credit. In no way do I think Elon is concerned other than hoping to wipe out one of his competitors, especially the one connected to a Not For Profit division. I assume that's why he drew attention to this story. I only recently found out (lol maybe through one of your other videos but also an article online) that OpenAI was originally a purely Not For Profit organization so Gen AI was meant to be free for everyone and that might explain (but not excuse) their initial approach of just using anything they found online. I'm betting they didn't consider the ramifications of impacting someone's artistic brand but they assumed if the results weren't monetized maybe it'd be okay. Then ofc someone at the top, I forget everyone's names, realized they were sitting on a potential gold mine (even if it was shady AF to use it that way) and created a For Profit division which... well, in theory helps fund the Not for Profit research but in actually just opens up a massive can of worms for everyone IMHO. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the researchers have some guilt about this situation; it's essentially a Pandora's Box. Gen AI probably shouldn't exist but if it must, then it absolutely never should've been monetized or allowed to be monetized. And that's not just because I'd never pay for it. This kind of technology is just something corporations want to a buse so they can remove as many skilled workers as possible which is what they always do and have done for centuries even if the option to use it in conjunction with skilled workers is not only possible but optimal. If there was such a thing as Universal Income or something else to help people survive it wouldn't matter as much but all it does is reduce the available jobs across the board, keeping control in the hands of the mega-corporations.
@DoveJS i feel exactly the same way. I think it might have been one of my videos, i think it always should have been free and never for profit. It might have been a tinfoil theory of mine at some point, lol. The guy seems like he was under a lot of stress after the NYT interview, it feels very samesies like the boeing incident. I'm not saying he has a good take but making note of it means we should also make note of it, imho. He wants openai completely shut down, while I know he's doing it for selfish reasons, I think only people and establishments with money will do something about it.
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist Right, and I agree that it won't be until people with money make a stand unfortunately. Sorry, that wasn't me saying that you thought he had a good take, just me being biased against Elon Musk. You also said he had some skin in the game so that was just me being grouchy and taking some more jabs at him. Especially since him poking at this one company now doesn't mean he won't backtrack when it comes to the company he has invested in, which is the actual problem with needing companies to fight for creative people's rights. We can't trust them to keep that stance for the long haul, only while it benefits them. 😅
But we could prevent it from happening, right? We can save jobs and prevent them being forced into AI. Specially with how much people hate it and that it’s not copyrightable? Or will it be fully implemented?
I’m sorry. I don’t understand. I asked if it was possible to save the industry and the jobs of artists, essentially, and prevent AI from being massively adopted.
lol according the the scotus if the image is transformative enough they don’t have to pay anyone. Just look at Warhol case where the literally trace a copyrighted photo and got away with it.
Maybe the whistleblower felt a sudden compulsion to sing Heart Shaped Box, and accidentally summoned a magical shotgun that whispered dark thoughts? Still pretty sketchy, though.
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist Tossing theories out there. Also, Kurt Cobain reference. But real talk, I would bet that dude was assassinated, the timing seems too convenient.
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist WOh, guess the title is phrased in a way where it seems it wasn't the whistleblower who died. Guess it's time to use Nightshade more then.
The problem with openai's "publicly available data" argument is that publicly available does NOT equal public domain. They know it's nonsense and they desperately hope nobody's smart enough to know the difference. It's tragic, but not at all surprising that a whistleblower would "self-eliminate" out of nowhere.
@tinyshinyfeathers exactly, for some reason they don't know the difference. I just read a new article about his parents opening an investigation because they said he was a happy guy.
6:02 Btw, private investigation's conclusion doesn't really point out to a "self-liquidation" incident. So the truth seems rather shadier than the mainstream narrative.
@mekingtiger9095 they said it wasn't homicide but there is other shadier ways to mess with a person.
The people that professionally unalive people don't leave clues and rarely get caught unless they get ratted out.
@@maxruedy951 that's true :(
I feel bad for him, RIP Suchir Balaji. It's possible it's more than that but like you said, holidays and depression, especially for stressed people, can go badly. Apparently a lot of people pass around this time of year for a variety of reasons. It's definitely suspicious timing but I also don't really trust Elon Musk to have a good take. I think he's got a deal with one of the other multi-billion dollar companies trying to make money off of Gen AI; I just can't remember which one it is. Elon is bad at everything and just has the rep he built up, using professional teams to do all of the hard work so he could take the credit. In no way do I think Elon is concerned other than hoping to wipe out one of his competitors, especially the one connected to a Not For Profit division. I assume that's why he drew attention to this story.
I only recently found out (lol maybe through one of your other videos but also an article online) that OpenAI was originally a purely Not For Profit organization so Gen AI was meant to be free for everyone and that might explain (but not excuse) their initial approach of just using anything they found online. I'm betting they didn't consider the ramifications of impacting someone's artistic brand but they assumed if the results weren't monetized maybe it'd be okay. Then ofc someone at the top, I forget everyone's names, realized they were sitting on a potential gold mine (even if it was shady AF to use it that way) and created a For Profit division which... well, in theory helps fund the Not for Profit research but in actually just opens up a massive can of worms for everyone IMHO. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the researchers have some guilt about this situation; it's essentially a Pandora's Box.
Gen AI probably shouldn't exist but if it must, then it absolutely never should've been monetized or allowed to be monetized. And that's not just because I'd never pay for it. This kind of technology is just something corporations want to a buse so they can remove as many skilled workers as possible which is what they always do and have done for centuries even if the option to use it in conjunction with skilled workers is not only possible but optimal. If there was such a thing as Universal Income or something else to help people survive it wouldn't matter as much but all it does is reduce the available jobs across the board, keeping control in the hands of the mega-corporations.
@DoveJS i feel exactly the same way. I think it might have been one of my videos, i think it always should have been free and never for profit. It might have been a tinfoil theory of mine at some point, lol. The guy seems like he was under a lot of stress after the NYT interview, it feels very samesies like the boeing incident.
I'm not saying he has a good take but making note of it means we should also make note of it, imho.
He wants openai completely shut down, while I know he's doing it for selfish reasons, I think only people and establishments with money will do something about it.
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist Right, and I agree that it won't be until people with money make a stand unfortunately. Sorry, that wasn't me saying that you thought he had a good take, just me being biased against Elon Musk. You also said he had some skin in the game so that was just me being grouchy and taking some more jabs at him. Especially since him poking at this one company now doesn't mean he won't backtrack when it comes to the company he has invested in, which is the actual problem with needing companies to fight for creative people's rights. We can't trust them to keep that stance for the long haul, only while it benefits them. 😅
@@DoveJS verytrue XD
On an unrelated note: Is it wrong that my brain classifies you as the "Bubblegum Elf"?
@The-Random-Hamlet ahaha it wouldn't be but I would say a bubblegum llama xD
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist I can see llama :)
that is tragic
@@legal2305 very, very tragic.
Yeah no this feels sus af you right
totally, i know it might just be mental illness taking over but it feels so short sighted
Hey there. Sorry, this whole AI thing has been terrible. You think we'll be able to protect people's jobs in the art industry or we are doomed?
@@lordsheogorath73production51 I don't think it's impossible, I think artists will be double worked in my opinion if forced to use AI in their field.
But we could prevent it from happening, right?
We can save jobs and prevent them being forced into AI. Specially with how much people hate it and that it’s not copyrightable? Or will it be fully implemented?
@@lordsheogorath73production51 I'm not sure, I would need more time with the tinfoil theories lol
I’m sorry. I don’t understand. I asked if it was possible to save the industry and the jobs of artists, essentially, and prevent AI from being massively adopted.
@@lordsheogorath73production51 I'm not sure, I'd have to think about it.
It’s a wild coincidence 😢
not scary at all
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist yup
I wouldn't be surprised either way.
@@The-Random-Hamlet same
lol according the the scotus if the image is transformative enough they don’t have to pay anyone. Just look at Warhol case where the literally trace a copyrighted photo and got away with it.
Also Elon is mad because he got kicked out of open ai.
Also make a video on stargate.
@@reniorjd ugh
Maybe the whistleblower felt a sudden compulsion to sing Heart Shaped Box, and accidentally summoned a magical shotgun that whispered dark thoughts? Still pretty sketchy, though.
Why would u say this :(?
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist Tossing theories out there. Also, Kurt Cobain reference. But real talk, I would bet that dude was assassinated, the timing seems too convenient.
@@itsyaboidaniel2919 i know, it was just a little mean. Lol
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist Understandable.
Nice! Guess there are some good news in the world after all.
good news? lol
@@friendlyneighborhoodartist WOh, guess the title is phrased in a way where it seems it wasn't the whistleblower who died.
Guess it's time to use Nightshade more then.
Two views in 26 seconds, Friendly felof
@@zerostarvevo no idea lol