"If you’re confused, don't worry; it’s been confusing everyone for two decades, and is a frequent topic of debate. To make it simple, think of it this way: If you go to WordPress.com to sign into your site, your site content is at risk of being used to train AI models. If your site is hosted anywhere other than WordPress.com (like on GoDaddy, Bluehost, or Siteground), then you have a self-hosted WordPress site."
Because of the general culture and mindset. Haven't found that anywhere else. That mindset also means they're going to get a whole lot of poison in their datasets.
This is such a flawed argument though, many of us remember when these services started coming out and the general Zeitgeist was "wow! What an amazing and interesting way to connect to each other!" There wasn't too much public concern that our works would be sold to companies because these were just "platforms" places where you could shout out to the world about your passion.
The idea that this was a mistake the end user should have known better about is wrong because there was no preconception that your creative ideas were at any sort of risk, AI didn't exist and it was commonly accepted that "of course you owned this, you made it".
If you apply such a modern lens to the very early stages of the internet, of course it's going to look stupid. But remember that most people at the time thought they'd be safe and wouldn't willingly subject themselves to this kind of treatment
I don’t disagree with you, nor am I trying to blame people who didn’t know. I didn’t know myself either 20 years ago. I’m just stating a fact and hope people can learn these, and if they still choose one thing over the other, don’t come and cry.
Is Wordpress a service? It seems to be software that is apparently runs on other people’s property. So this is what I’m confused about. I write a blog that is served by a non-profit org and the software is apparently Wordpress. I don’t understand how the copyright on my work in this context would exempt Wordpress in any way.
Is that legal? When you sign onto a proprietary platform you usually sign away your rights, but with lemmy this isn't the case, so scraping your data to use to train AI would violate copyright laws, right?
They could, and we couldn't stop them, but I think they legally couldn't use content from other instances or even from users from other instances. Not that that will stop them, of course.
I was expecting some suggestions to act or unite in opposition. The linked post has none of that though, despite its title. It's a rant/criticism, not a call to action.
Yet idiots keep upvoting it. Lemmy really isn't any better than Reddit. I'll get down voted for saying this though because apparently it's taboo to criticize lemmy. We have to pretend like it's somehow magically protected from all the things that made reddit suck ass.
Huh? I know..... But why would you upvote shitposts like this for visibility? Isn't that the exact opposite of what it should be used for? Do you purposely upvote shitposts "for visibility?" If so, fuck you lol.
