|
If China really has found a way to protect an IP from AI garbage then that's the biggest IP concern of the future all solved before anybody else is even willing to admit it's a problem, that alone would be enough to put it on anybody's radar. I'm not sure what this looks like but even tackling it publicly and calling it what it is is a step above anybody else. If they're also the source of most IP theft presently then that just means they're in the position of Cobra Commander in the old Cobra Commander for President front page thing where he promised to end all terrorism across the globe overnight with a single phone call, or the Thieves Guild in Ankh-Morpork
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:They've already been cracking down for a bit now, so it's not unprecedented. Not sure what an inaccessible (beyond the abstract) law journal article from just a year ago is supposed to prove in the face of the continued obvious existence everyone sees in the real world with every open market flooded with knock off merchandise from increasingly nonsensical "brands" as well as the known and continuing industries in China centered around using and selling factory seconds under the table. Saying that China changed the laws is meaningless if they still don't really enforce them nor if they have any real effect on what is happening. Makes me thing that was just the first thing you could find when googling "China stopping IP theft" that wasn't from a US news source or the US government.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 17:41
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:At best, that doesn't make any real sense. At worst, it's thinly veiled Yellow Peril nonsense. Berne works because you can seek remedy from basically everywhere, so at least some degree of registration would happen. They wouldn't be 'making folks speak mandarin' literally, but pushing ways of thinking that are very PRC alligned, much as disney or cawadoody does now for america? That is more what would happen. StratGoatCom fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Apr 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:Berne works because you can seek remedy from basically everywhere, so at least some degree of registration would happen. They wouldn't be 'making folks speak mandarin' literally, but pushing ways of thinking that are very PRC alligned, much as disney or cawadoody does now? That is more what would happen. That doesn't address anything Paineframe said and is just more unsupported Yellow Peril nonsense. The imaged scenario is that China becomes, somehow and with no support, the only place that protects IP law, and the rest of the world descends into a complete hell-hole where you have no rights? When US copyright and Trademark law is some of the strongest in the world (if you're a big company) already and, as you yourself have already stated in this thread, will in no way allow for AI art to become "copyrightable". So...??? What is this new fixation on the PRC leading the world against AI art?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Crain posted:That doesn't address anything Paineframe said and is just more unsupported Yellow Peril nonsense. The imaged scenario is that China becomes, somehow and with no support, the only place that protects IP law, and the rest of the world descends into a complete hell-hole where you have no rights? When US copyright and Trademark law is some of the strongest in the world (if you're a big company) already and, as you yourself have already stated in this thread, will in no way allow for AI art to become "copyrightable". So...??? I doubt it would get that bad, but it would be more like how we have libel tourism or now, or tax evasion, in the unlikely event that scraping isn't shitcanned everywhere. The main reason is preserve their own poo poo, but geopolitical advantage is useful side benefit if it comes to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
Yeah and Japan is going to take over the global car industry because they invented Kan-ban. This is just day dreaming with zero support. 1) China bans AI 2)?????? 3) Glorious PRC global domination
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:Berne works because you can seek remedy from basically everywhere, so at least some degree of registration would happen. They wouldn't be 'making folks speak mandarin' literally, but pushing ways of thinking that are very PRC alligned, much as disney or cawadoody does now for america? That is more what would happen. Why? How do we go from "China says that Chinese generative algorithms can't use training sets with copyrighted works -> ?????? -> Mickey Mouse becomes an agent of Chinese cultural imperialism"? You really need to fill in these blanks so we can talk about whether that middle step would actually lead to that final step. The proposed rule does not actually change anything for anyone except Chinese companies wanting to create generative AIs. IP owners are not directly affected and there's no reason for them to change anything they're doing because of it. And the Berne Convention goes against your theory. It doesn't say that registering a work in China means the entire world has to follow Chinese copyright law - it says that registering a work in one country means that all countries have to treat those works equally to domestic works under their own copyright law. Which means that China would have to apply Chinese copyright law to American-registered works, and America would have to apply American copyright law to Chinese-registered works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
Crain posted:Yeah and Japan is going to take over the global car industry because they invented Kan-ban. The chain of events is 'some very stupid western jurisdictions allow AI scraping under fair use or something, their copyright using industries bail en mass at least in registration, china benefits, uses it to influence the fleeing companies, like making the super vehicle the protagonists use some Norinco monstrosity' . It's not clear they will be that stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:03
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:The chain of events is 'some very stupid western jurisdictions allow AI scraping under fair use or something, their copyright using industries bail en mass at least in registration, china benefits, uses it to influence the fleeing companies, like making the super vehicle the protagonists use some Norinco monstrosity' . You are talking out your rear end and stringing spurious slippery slope chain of events together, each of which require massive suspension of disbelief, to come to a conclusion that involves a complete upending of international hegemony over simple IP law... You might as well be claiming that India nationalizing a perfect passable plant based beef substitute will make them the new cultural capital. Because it'll remove beef farming! Which solves global warming! And all the chefs will want to work there! And Bollywood takes over Hollywood! Reasons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:The chain of events is 'some very stupid western jurisdictions allow AI scraping under fair use or something, their copyright using industries bail en mass at least in registration, china benefits, uses it to influence the fleeing companies, like making the super vehicle the protagonists use some Norinco monstrosity' .
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:11
|
|
|
If capitalism hasn't blackballed China due to ip theft by now they never will, and honestly I can't fault China for wanting to level the playing field without having to be a vassal state of the US. They have a very good reason not to trust 'the west' given what we've done to other countries and China in particular. Why can't China pass laws to limit ai models anyways? What's the reason for stopping them?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:23
|
|
|
Watermelon Daiquiri posted:
Oh they can. There's nothing to stop them and no reason they shouldn't pass those laws. It just won't be some lynch pin in some plan to take over the world by becoming the cultural center of the world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
Watermelon Daiquiri posted:If capitalism hasn't blackballed China due to ip theft by now they never will, and honestly I can't fault China for wanting to level the playing field without having to be a vassal state of the US. They have a very good reason not to trust 'the west' given what we've done to other countries and China in particular. They can. I am making an argument that them limiting AI models is a natural part of an IP protection push, as well as protecting their own industry and may well give them a competitive advantage if the techbros talk the UK or something into doing something remarkably stupid with scraping laws, and if the stupid is widespread enough... well, they can make more than commercial hay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
Yeah, that sounds like a good thing
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
Bud you got convinced by a lovely goggle translate "China #1" propaganda post that China will take over because you have this unexplained obsession with the idea that if people are allowed to copyright AI art at all it will mean the end of all creative industries. Calm down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
Crain posted:Bud you got convinced by a lovely goggle translate "China #1" propaganda post that China will take over because you have this unexplained obsession with the idea that if people are allowed to copyright AI art at all it will mean the end of all creative industries. lmao, it's literally a response to a chinese release on a draft.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:lmao, it's literally a response to a chinese release on a draft. No it's not. It's wistfully gazing into a future where the PRC takes over with zero support for any claim it makes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
Here's a sort of abstract question that feels worth considering - why does China have such a reputation of making knock-offs, and, by contrast why aren't they producing a volume of original creative work proportional to their population size? I think practically speaking, the answer to the first is that they have a ton of people, industrial development, and a government that sees making things in-house as a virtue. The reason for the second is that: A. Many of the resources that would have been allocated towards new work are instead spent on copycats B. Creativity has a higher cost when compared to reproduction, so in a country where reproduction is unregulated there is little to be gained in investing in abstract possibilities instead of copying an existing success C. Government censorship makes it so that certain forms of art are not permissible, and this has a chilling effect on overall creative expression D. The cultural dynamics of China are not palatable to many artists, and so there is probably some degree of brain-drain from the highly talented moving abroad Given these considerations, the conclusion I tend towards here is that kneecapping AI makes sense if you think that the government has a vested interest in keeping people employed in copycat industries over creative endeavors, and so it may be viewed as a move away from a potential source of automation. Additionally, in a country where the government wants total control over media consumption, it seems logical that they would want to plug holes on anything that can spit out "new" media essentially at random - if a data set includes something that the government doesn't like, then with the right set of keywords that item can be retrieved. Since the government might have trouble thoroughly combing through a truly enormous dataset, they benefit from making it as difficult as possible to get anything external into a dataset, and they probably want to make examples of someone with this law to cut things off before they get any bigger. Of course, this will probably lead to a government-controlled version of anything useful that comes out of the tech, same as with social media sites and what-have-you. Obviously this is all specifically wrt the government of the country and their policy goals, rather than any kind of sweeping generalization of the populace's mindset - this move was decided by the same small handful of people who manipulate currency to influence import/export dynamics, so it should be viewed with those policy preferences as the lens. All of that to say, no, creatives are not going to move to China so they can be forced to jump through hoops to communicate with people outside - and that suits the Chinese government just fine, as they don't want potential rabble-rousers entering the country anyway
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 19:35
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:They can. I am making an argument that them limiting AI models is a natural part of an IP protection push, as well as protecting their own industry and may well give them a competitive advantage if the techbros talk the UK or something into doing something remarkably stupid with scraping laws, and if the stupid is widespread enough... well, they can make more than commercial hay. Except there's no competitive advantage, because this law doesn't do anything to restrict companies outside China. Under this rule, work created by a Chinese author working for a Chinese company and registered with Chinese copyright authorities would still be perfectly valid to include in training sets for AIs overseas. As such, there's no incentive for artists, writers, or media companies to move to China. In fact, the Berne Convention expressly prohibits countries from giving favorable copyright treatment to domestic works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 19:37
|
|
|
I think you're conflating culture with business there. There's a TON of Chinese art out there if you look.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 19:39
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:why aren't they producing a volume of original creative work proportional to their population size?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:Here's a sort of abstract question that feels worth considering - why does China have such a reputation of making knock-offs, and, by contrast why aren't they producing a volume of original creative work proportional to their population size? Uh, the answer to the first is that copy-cats and knockoffs are easy to make because China was and is the worlds sweatshop. You don't need to spend extra effort to "make" a copy cat, you just take the factory seconds or QA rejected pieces and use them anyway. It's a perfectly capitalistic response to their reality. They don't need to exert any extra effort to make a knock off, hell they don't need to exert any nominal initial effort. They're already making the "real" item. The knock offs are just what the primary producer decided they didn't want. So they take the excess and sell it for less. Which also invalidates your second points because there is no "top down" effort to push national labor towards making copycats. It's a side effect. Also there is a ton of Chinese art, it just rarely breaches into the global consciousness due to socio-political reasons. Part of that is that China is incredibly insular due to PRC policies wrt the internet, trade, and commerce.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 20:19
|
|
|
Crain posted:Uh, the answer to the first is that copy-cats and knockoffs are easy to make because China was and is the worlds sweatshop. You don't need to spend extra effort to "make" a copy cat, you just take the factory seconds or QA rejected pieces and use them anyway. It's a perfectly capitalistic response to their reality. They don't need to exert any extra effort to make a knock off, hell they don't need to exert any nominal initial effort. They're already making the "real" item. The knock offs are just what the primary producer decided they didn't want. So they take the excess and sell it for less. This might be an issue of me failing to communicate properly but nothing you said disagrees with my intended point - governmental policy reduces creative expression across all industries because the cost of innovation is borne by the initial investor, and not by people making the copycat product. That is true whether you are talking about something like taking a patented formula or just taking scraps from a factory that someone else built. This isn't to say that one way is better than the other necessarily, and certainly not compensating foreigners for their IP or patented tech has obvious short-term monetary gains, but also means that laborers that may otherwise have the skill to innovate will be economically induced to instead duplicate. On the second point, how is there no top-down effort to push copycats if by your own admission the government makes it deliberately difficult to successfully export new products? To be clear, I'm not talking about copycats solely in the sense of knock-offs of popular brands, but in the sense of products with no new creative input needed. Your argument seems to be that a lack of positive incentives for this model means the government doesn't plan for this, but what I am arguing is that through various negative incentives around innovation they are still making a deliberate choice about their systems. In this case, I would view this ban on AI datasets as being an extension of their censorship policies, as they want to be able to have a law on the books to slap down whoever tries the "an AI made it" argument. It also conveniently gives them a reason to demand full datasets from anyone claiming to have an AI product, which will continue to keep their garden fenced That said, the other point about global rejection of Chinese products is also true, i.e. the US looking at banning TikTok ostensibly for giving full access to user data to the Chinese government, but I think the governmental policies around incoming and outgoing data are much more salient, as far as the broader "cultural dominance" argument is concerned (i.e. nothing the government does would ever convince creators to move their businesses to China considering the boatload of risks it comes with) Ruffian Price posted:media's vested interest in not letting you know about it? there's an inverse, private run great firewall see, this is more what I was trying to pull out here, because if this is true for "media", why isn't it true for any other private industry? The reality is that, rather than there being some "private run great firewall" the issue is just that if someone in China uploads their stuff onto the Chinese internet ecosystem, there isn't a button they can click to also share it to Facebook or Twitter or whatever - and that is also factored into the decision to HAVE a great firewall. These government policies create a practical limit to monetarily successful artistic endeavors, and the government either views that as a positive or thinks these disadvantaged creatives are a lower priority than whatever ends the great firewall achieves. Similarly, the policies on games with gore and such made them uncompetitive in international markets for a long time, and also led to a further reduction in exchange of art between China and the rest of the world - this is also deliberate, obviously. Contrarily, Chinese has absolutely 0 qualms about exporting massive amounts of physical goods, and countries obviously have no issues accepting those goods (or at least the consumers in those countries don't, obviously there are many governments and international organizations that view these trade policies as harmful). In other words, China's reputation for knock-offs is the result of a regulatory environment that does nothing to stop them, while simultaneously strongly discouraging imports and exports of creative/artistic products Edit: I guess I would say is the TL;DR here is that China's international economic policy is export-focused almost exclusively, and this is by design. If there was a way to do the same thing with media (only export, never import) they would do it in a heartbeat, but that is inherently not how cultural exchange works, and so because they have throttled imports of artistic expression, the effect is mirrored in their exports of artistic expression. What China does with AI and IP is therefore of very little consequence globally, and it isn't going to do anything to shape how other countries deal with it or induce artists to move to China or anything - more than likely, the issue is, at least in part, that the same people that got upset about their leader being depicted as Winnie-the-Pooh really don't want the general populace to be able to make 100 versions of that in 60 seconds, and whatever fig leaf they give for why they are going to derail AI projects is secondary to their actual motivations BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Apr 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 21:10
|
|
|
The domestic consumer base in China is also a bit larger than all of Europe and the entire Americas combined which probably has something to do with things. But for Brazil it wouldn't even be close, and Chinese incomes are rising and the middle class growing which a lot of the former have to really torture statistics to claim. If you're an up and coming artist or singer there probably isn't actually any NEED to search outside the country unless whatever you're doing is specifically unpopular domestically, which is only more true if you believe that goods naturally seek out the most profitable market. There's no share to Facebook button or whatever that's true, but the plain fact is that we're coming up on the point where they're probably going to be proven right to distrust and tightly regulate social media.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 21:32
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:The domestic consumer base in China is also a bit larger than all of Europe and the entire Americas combined which probably has something to do with things. But for Brazil it wouldn't even be close, and Chinese incomes are rising and the middle class growing which a lot of the former have to really torture statistics to claim. If you're an up and coming artist or singer there probably isn't actually any NEED to search outside the country unless whatever you're doing is specifically unpopular domestically, which is only more true if you believe that goods naturally seek out the most profitable market. There's no share to Facebook button or whatever that's true, but the plain fact is that we're coming up on the point where they're probably going to be proven right to distrust and tightly regulate social media. The effect on individual artists within the country is neither here nor there, the conversation is about overall cultural exports, in response to posts like this: StratGoatCom posted:They can. I am making an argument that them limiting AI models is a natural part of an IP protection push, as well as protecting their own industry and may well give them a competitive advantage if the techbros talk the UK or something into doing something remarkably stupid with scraping laws, and if the stupid is widespread enough... well, they can make more than commercial hay. So, essentially, we are ONLY talking about endeavors that have the flexibility to be based in one of several countries, which pretty much is exclusively made up of projects that want/need to sell internationally (the Disneys or EAs or w/e), or at the least projects which have international staff and audiences (Fortnight or Path of Exile or whatever other example is owned by a Chinese company but has international players/creative teams). You make it sound like the exception, but for the sake of this argument it is the rule. Again, I'm not saying "Chinese people don't make art" or "Chinese people can't be creative", I'm saying "the reason people think about China as exporting knock-offs and not exporting art is because the Chinese government have designed their economic policy to do the first and not the second" Essentially, my point is that Korea and Japan do a lot more exporting if art/media with a lot less population, and it isn't because the populace is "more creative" intrinsically, and it isn't because they are THAT much richer on a per capita basis, it is because the regulatory environment cuts into their exports India is another useful comparison, they have been exporting Bollywood and the like for a long time despite starting from behind compared to the colonialist competitors, and in spite of much of the country being much poorer and rural BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Apr 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 21:44
|
|
|
Do people actually get upset about the Winnie the Pooh thing? Like are there significant documented instances of it happening? I have a friend who went to Disneyland Shanghai recently and there was Pooh stuff there.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 21:51
|
|
|
Watermelon Daiquiri posted:Do people actually get upset about the Winnie the Pooh thing? Like are there significant documented instances of it happening? I have a friend who went to Disneyland Shanghai recently and there was Pooh stuff there. The issue was never "Winnie-the-Pooh" it was "Xi is Winnie-the-Pooh". If you have an image generator with a bunch of images of Winnie-the-Pooh and Xi, then you can create an infinite number of hybrid images faster than they can be censored That was also just a convenient example because it was the first thing that came to mind, but I'm sure there are plenty of other things that the government needs SOMEONE to be held accountable for, and having something on the books that will scare away AI companies is probably more important to the policy-makers than IP theft BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Apr 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:by contrast why aren't they producing a volume of original creative work proportional to their population size? That's a huge loving assertion to randomly pull out of your rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2023 23:13
|
|
|
Watermelon Daiquiri posted:Do people actually get upset about the Winnie the Pooh thing? Like are there significant documented instances of it happening? I have a friend who went to Disneyland Shanghai recently and there was Pooh stuff there. There was an interview with Peng Shuai where she had a Winnie the Pooh plush in the background and oh boy did people lose their minds. Basically people do lose their minds over it, but they're not Chinese. And seem really keen on depicting a Chinese person as being literally yellow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 01:38
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:There was an interview with Peng Shuai where she had a Winnie the Pooh plush in the background and oh boy did people lose their minds. The Chinese government literally censored Winnie the Pooh and Xi searches, Winnie the pooh gifs, and Winnie the Pooh/Xi memes from the internet and banned two separate Winnie the Pooh films. So, someone there is definitely aware and upset about it. https://www.npr.org/2023/03/23/1165504942/winnie-the-pooh-xi-jinping-china-film
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The Chinese government literally censored Winnie the Pooh and Xi searches, Winnie the pooh gifs, and Winnie the Pooh/Xi memes from the internet and banned two separate Winnie the Pooh films. So, someone there is definitely aware and upset about it. It's amazing how thinned skinned most dictators seem to be. Like it seems like half of them probably cry themselves to sleep because everyone's being mean to them or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 03:19
|
|
|
Is this the thread for dunking on Crypto bros, or is that somewhere else?quote:He claims the exchange’s celebrity boosters didn’t do their due diligence to check whether they may be breaking the law before cutting TV and digital ads for FTX.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 03:31
|
|
|
Infosec Tay Tay is real! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 03:34
|
|
|
Lmfao at tswift not wanting anything to do with a Bitcoin scam
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 03:46
|
|
|
withak posted:Lmfao at tswift not wanting anything to do with a Bitcoin scam Her dad's a finance guy, right? So, it's not that surprising.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 03:51
|
|
|
Your successful scammer will carefully avoid, like the plague, speaking to anyone with even moderate intelligence and trying to get them in on the scam. This is why scam e-mails and calls are so obviously full of poo poo -- they can't risk someone who's not a moron loving up the works. This is also why the scam-baiters on YouTube are actually much more skilled than they seem (or at least, it's why they use a voice-changer). I tried that poo poo once, they clocked me right away and hung up with an urgency.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 06:13
|
|
|
dr_rat posted:It's amazing how thinned skinned most dictators seem to be. Like it seems like half of them probably cry themselves to sleep because everyone's being mean to them or something. Not surprising though and has little to do with their ego (except when Erdogan sues German comedians for making fun of him). They have already banned all direct protest, they're not going to let resistance simmer under the cover of symbols or memes that the public understands because that would undermine the primary censorship. Like how in Russia you will get taken away if you are holding a blank piece of paper in a public place. If someone went to hold their hands as if they were holding a sign then I bet they would stop that as well. Everyone knows what it's about and therefore it is harmful to the government if people start seeing coded symbols of opposition everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 09:21
|
|
|
Speaking of unregistered securities https://twitter.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1648302752248856579
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 13:48
|
|
|
Karia posted:you MUTE mielle? Still thinking about this post
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
Ruffian Price posted:Still thinking about this post I am glad my joke was able to cause such lasting trauma.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 17:57
|
|
