this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
730 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

59583 readers
3322 users here now

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


Our Rules


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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

OpenAI now tries to hide that ChatGPT was trained on copyrighted books, including J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series::A new research paper laid out ways in which AI developers should try and avoid showing LLMs have been trained on copyrighted material.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Why are people defending a massive corporation that admits it is attempting to create something that will give them unparalleled power if they are successful?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Mostly because fuck corporations trying to milk their copyright. I have no particular love for OpenAI (though I do like their product), but I do have great distain for already-successful corporations that would hold back the progress of humanity because they didn't get paid (again).

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Perhaps, and when that happens I would be equally disdainful towards them.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

In the United States there was a judgement made the other day saying that works created soley by AI are not copyright-able. So that that would put a speed bumb there.
I may have misunderstood what you though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, they might not copyright it, but after it becomes the 'one true AI', it will be at the hands of Microsoft, so please do not act friendly towards them.

It will turn on you just like every private company has.

(don't mean specifically you, but everyone generally)

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Huh. Doesn't this means technically AI cannot do copyright infringement.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah, it would mean that you cannot copyright a work created by an AI, such as a piece of art.

E.g. if you tell it to draw you a donkey carting avocados, the picture can be used by anyone from what I understand.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

you cannot copyright a work created by an AI, such as a piece of art.

That's what I said. Copyright infringement is when there is another copyrightable object that is copy of first object. AI is not witin copyright area. You can't copyright it, but also you can't be sued for copyright infringement too.

if you tell it to draw you a donkey carting avocados, the picture can be used by anyone from what I understand.

Yes. Same for Public Domain, but PD is another status. PD applies only to copyrightable work.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's like argument "but new politicians will steal more" that I hear in Russia from people who protect Putin

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's literally not, wtf.

Do not let any private entity to get overwhelming majority on anything period.

But do not kid yourself that Microsoft will let OpenAI do anything for public once it gets big enough.

OpenAI is open only in name after they rolled back all the promises of being for everyone.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's my entire point. It's not who, but how long.

Also Microsoft plays both sides here. OpenAI vs copyright is wrong question. There's more: both are status-quo. Both are for keeping corporate ownership of ideas.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

There's a massive difference though between corporations milking copyright and authors/musicians/artists wanting their copyright respected. All I see here is a corporation milking copyrighted works by creative individuals.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because everyone learns from books, it's stupid.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An LLM is not a person, it is a product. It doesn't matter that it "learns" like a human - at the end of the day, it is a product created by a corporation that used other people's work, with the capacity to disrupt the market that those folks' work competes in.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

How are we going to make ai, if it can't learn?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AI is the new fan boy following since it became official that nfts are all fucking scams. They need a new technological God to push to feel superior to everyone else...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Are you ok? You seem upset

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

Leftists hating on AI while dreaming of post-scarcity will never not be funny