this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024

467 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

59422 readers

2973 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

467

Leaked Documents Show Nvidia Scraping ‘A Human Lifetime’ of Videos Per Day to Train AI (www.404media.co)

submitted 3 months ago by misk@sopuli.xyz to c/technology@lemmy.world

73 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://archive.is/2024.08.05-162750/https://www.404media.co/nvidia-ai-scraping-foundational-model-cosmos-project/

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] R00bot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 42 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

I feel like the amount of training data required for these AIs serves as a pretty compelling argument as to why AI is clearly nowhere near human intelligence. It shouldn't take thousands of human lifetimes of data to train an AI if it's truly near human-level intelligence. In fact, I think it's an argument for them not being intelligent whatsoever. With that much training data, everything that could be asked of them should be in the training data. And yet they still fail at any task not in their data.

Put simply; a human needs less than 1 lifetime of training data to be more intelligent than AI. If it hasn't already solved it, I don't think throwing more training data/compute at the problem will solve this.

[–] rdri@lemmy.world 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There is no "intelligence", ai is a pr word. Just a language model that feeds on a lot of data.

[–] R00bot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 months ago

Oh yeah we're 100% agreed on that. I'm thinking of the AI evangelicals who will argue tooth and nail that LLMs have "emergent properties" of intelligence, and that it's simply an issue of training data/compute power before we'll get some digital god being. Unfortunately these people exist, and they're depressingly common. They've definitely reduced in numbers since AI hype has died down though.

[–] Hunter232@programming.dev 12 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Humans have the advantage of billions of years of evolution.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You’ve had the entire history of evolution to get the instinct you have today.

Nature Vs Nurture is a huge ongoing debate.

Just because it takes longer to train doesn’t mean it’s not intelligent, kids develop slower than chimps.

Also intelligent doesn’t really mean anything, I personally think Intelligence is the ability to distillate unusable amounts of raw data and intuit a result beneficial to one’s self. But very few people agree with me.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

A human lifetime worth of video is not anywhere close to equalling a human lifetime of actual corporeal existence, even in the perfect scenario where the AI is as capable as a human brain.

[–] R00bot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 months ago

Strange to equate the other senses to performance in intellectual tasks but sure. Do you think feeding data from smells, touch, taste, etc. into an AI along with the video will suddenly make it intelligent? No, it will just make it more likely to guess what something smells like. I think it's very clear that our current approach to AI is missing something much more fundamental to thought than that, it's not just a dataset problem.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 35 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Humans don't live that long. That's only about 1.5 million 30 min videos, which isn't a huge amount for a whole day's worth of scraping.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah this is honestly an order of magnitude less that I would've thought

[–] Infynis@midwest.social 5 points 3 months ago

Maybe they're running out

[–] mrfriki@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I would be lucky if I get to watch more than 10000 videos in my entire lifetime.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

Bro you're doing it with your eyes, right now!

[–] twei@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 months ago

That’s only about 1.5 million 30 min videos

aka 2 videos from Quinton Reviews

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 34 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Properly following licensing, right?

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, see, because it's "learning like a human", and everybody knows that you're allowed to bypass any licensing for learning. /s

But seriously I don't know how they make the jump to these conclusions either.

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

This is a massive strawman argument. No one is saying you shouldn't have a license to view the content in order to train an AI on it. Most of the information used to train these models is publicly available and licensed for public viewing.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 17 points 3 months ago (19 children)

Just because something is available for public viewing does not mean it's licensed for anything except personal use.

The strawman here is that since physical people benefit from personal use exceptions in the law, machine learning software should too. But why should they? Since when is a piece of software ran by a corporation equivalent to an individual person?

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 months ago

A tangentially related but good example of this sort of thing is BluRays and community movie nights (like setting up a projector in a park).

Most of these movie nights are de facto illegal, as even though you own the BluRay, it is not licensed for public showings, just for personal use. Obviously no one gives enough of a shit to enforce this against small groups, especially if they aren't making money off it, but if a theater started offering showings of shit the owner just bought on BluRay or UHD disks, it wouldn't last too long.

Similar thing here. Just because you can access the content to view it yourself doesn't mean you have the rights to do more than that with it. As an individual, you're likely fine to break those rules. As a giant fucking corporation, it's time for you to pay up.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Since when is a piece of software ran by a ~~corporation~~ person equivalent to an individual person?

Gotta remember that legally a corporation IS a person.

Another great example of how the law is batshit serving capital and destroying the planet.

load more comments (17 replies)

[–] 31337@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Information wants to be free.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.org 27 points 3 months ago (4 children)

instead of focusing on their products and improving them for everyone, some shitty ceo is pushing their shitty ai agenda down everyones throat.

[–] Drewelite@lemmynsfw.com 12 points 3 months ago

Well it sounds like they're doing something to make their products better, you just disagree that it's going to be successful.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] SomeGuy69@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

So they use VMs to simulate user accounts, in future this will be blocked and whatever new AI startup is there won't have the option to do so. Competition blocked. Forever.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

There's only a handful of video datasets and all of it is owned by Google through YouTube or big Hollywood companies like Disney and Netflix.

These companies are foaming at the mouth with rage thinking about what generative AI will do to their industry and how much it will help the currently non existant indie one. They will do whatever it takes to fence in the playbox and make sure they get to be the toll man.

This was never about AI getting to live or not, but who gets to own it. 404media is essentially a mouthpiece for these corporations, willingly or not, and the strengthening of copyright laws will not help the consumers or the small time creators. The only exception being laws that force copy left licenses onto models but that's not what is being pushed right now, as well as aocs Deepfake act which is well thought out imo.

Anyone should be permitted to train on YouTube and Netflix data, and Nvidia might even open source it in any case.

[–] Sconrad122@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (14 children)

Nvidia does not have a strong history of open sourcing things, to say the least. That last bit sounds like pure hopium

load more comments (14 replies)

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 months ago

Can relate, I watched the English patient once.

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

I hope they aren’t on Comcast.

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Something like that was a plot point in Black Mirror. In that case it was with consciousnesses.

load more comments