6 ms·

Really neat! > Second, the instruction data is based OpenAI’s text-davinci-003, whose terms of use prohibit developing models that compete with OpenAI. Wow, t

Really neat! > Second, the instruction data is based OpenAI’s text-davinci-003, whose terms of use prohibit developing models that compete with OpenAI. Wow, that seems really sketchy on the part of OpenAI. Even considering their overall lack of openness, this clause feels particularly egregious.

flangola7 4y ago
That has to run afoul of competition/antitrust laws and be unforceable. Imagine if Ford tried to tell people you can't use their pickups to carry tools around on a new Honda plant construction site.
- panarky 4y ago
  What if all the Honda plant does is remove the Ford logo and replace it with a Honda logo.
  - OkGoDoIt 4y ago
    Wouldn’t the first sale doctrine protect that? As long as the Honda dealership isn’t abusing the Ford trademark, my understanding is it’s perfectly legal to buy a product, modify it (even by removing branding), and then resell it. Of course with software you don’t really buy it, you license it, so there’s a lot more worms in that can of worms. Cars were simple by comparison
  - speed_spread 4y ago
    Workers would leave of their own Accord.
  - flangola7 4y ago
    That doesn't have anything to do with the tools used to build the plant.
kir-gadjello 4y ago
Charitably speaking the researchers had little time to execute this, so they just ended up using the well known OpenAI API. Still, it would be very useful if someone used LLaMA-65B instead of text-davinci-003 here. Someone should ask the researchers, either via email or via github pull request, it shouldn't even be that hard to do.
alwayslikethis 4y ago
I wonder if this is legally enforceable. If Microsoft is right with Copilot on the point that training models counts as "fair use", then the only thing stopping people from fine tuning their own models are these terms of use, which seems like it can be easily sidestepped by having an intermediate person/company to "process" the outputs.

flangola7 4y ago

That has to run afoul of competition/antitrust laws and be unforceable. Imagine if Ford tried to tell people you can't use their pickups to carry tools around on a new Honda plant construction site.

panarky 4y ago
What if all the Honda plant does is remove the Ford logo and replace it with a Honda logo.
- OkGoDoIt 4y ago
  Wouldn’t the first sale doctrine protect that? As long as the Honda dealership isn’t abusing the Ford trademark, my understanding is it’s perfectly legal to buy a product, modify it (even by removing branding), and then resell it. Of course with software you don’t really buy it, you license it, so there’s a lot more worms in that can of worms. Cars were simple by comparison
- speed_spread 4y ago
  Workers would leave of their own Accord.
- flangola7 4y ago
  That doesn't have anything to do with the tools used to build the plant.

kir-gadjello 4y ago

Charitably speaking the researchers had little time to execute this, so they just ended up using the well known OpenAI API. Still, it would be very useful if someone used LLaMA-65B instead of text-davinci-003 here. Someone should ask the researchers, either via email or via github pull request, it shouldn't even be that hard to do.

alwayslikethis 4y ago

I wonder if this is legally enforceable. If Microsoft is right with Copilot on the point that training models counts as "fair use", then the only thing stopping people from fine tuning their own models are these terms of use, which seems like it can be easily sidestepped by having an intermediate person/company to "process" the outputs.