if you don't have a contract with the utility you almost certainly violate the law, at least in Europe, but then again I don't know what the US regulation is
That's a contract between users and HN. Airtrain is a 3rd-party.
If HN API exposes personal information publicly through their API then there is a problem.
And AFAICT the only way for HN to prevent user comments from being used by 3rd-party is preventing access to those comments, meaning a) sign-up will have to be more stringent and b) visitors will have to sign-in just to read (or scrape) comments.
Data selection depends the use-case. Two contrasting use-cases I see are:
- Emulation
- Advisor
In case of MTG player emulation for example, I think it makes sense to group data by some rankable criteria like winrate to train rank-specific models that can mimic players of each rank.
Leaking original data would expose the company to direct copyright violation lawsuits. Changing T&S is simplest way to stave the legal risk exposure, buying time to implement technical remedies.
As ridiculous as it may seem, they're doing the right thing.
I always find it amusing when criminals threaten legal action. Happens all the time. They steal your property then they cower behind their legal rights.
I've had no problem using Microsoft's toil for free by downloading free windows ISOs all my life, so if they want to pirate my Github code it's not bad enough to care about. Besides the bad practices the model might internalize as a result that is
Good for you, don't post your code on GitHub then, as they have an express terms of service about being able to use code submitted for business purposes, including AI model training.
I am not sure what you mean by "my culture," what are you basing that off of? Why would you knowingly and willingly add an ad hominem? Very strange behavior in discourse.
GitHub has always had such clauses, even if they were not explicit about AI model training in particular. It is best to self host your own git instance if you are so worried.
I made it my mission to get the lot of them mad. There are plenty of legitimate ai companies out there but YC seems fond of those unethical, which explains the infusion of ip stealing startups on here and their simps.
It will be interesting to see how it plays out. I can imagine Wiley, McGraw Hill, Pearson and other publishers[0] of educational content OpenAI used could sell the rights to their material to be used for training GPT, but the price would be high enough we would be paying $100/month instead of $20.
[0] Heck, they could even unite and found an LLM startup themselves training the models legally and making it available for users at various tiers.
“don’t touch the unsecured, loaded firearm that is sitting on the counter, that might be stolen, maybe even got a body on it, don’t look too close, or you can be kicked out of the club for not following the rules”
reply