4 ms·

This wouldn't be an issue if we actually recognized the theft of intellectual property that underlies training of these LLMs. I don't know if OpenAI would consi

This wouldn't be an issue if we actually recognized the theft of intellectual property that underlies training of these LLMs. I don't know if OpenAI would consider it okay if someone took a NN and trained it on their private IP and the net's weights, then generated their own GPT-4 based on it. I don't think they'd say it's "fair use" then, otherwise, every person at OpenAI who has access to the internals is a fool not to do that and open up their own start up. The fair-use argument holds no water, and if we didn't have a broken government in the US, it certainly would doom these tools to being trained only on data they've generated themselves, which is how it should be.

drstewart 4y ago
>This wouldn't be an issue if we actually recognized the theft of intellectual property that underlies training of these LLMs Suddenly people think copying things on the internet is theft again. What happened to "its just a copyright violation and nobody loses anything anyway, it's not theft!" when you're torrenting movies and video games? >The fair-use argument holds no water, and if we didn't have a broken government in the US, it certainly would doom these tools to being trained only on data they've generated themselves, which is how it should be. Well surely the "fixed" and "working" governments of Canada and the EU will take action against this promptly! Can you share the bills they've already passed that will doom these tools?
- agentultra 4y ago
  IANAL but these seem like two different accusations. Copying a movie and watching it in your own home and sharing it with your neighbour is different from redistributing a new film you claim is your own but is derived directly from the movie you downloaded; sure your changed the character names and dubbed over a few lines but you didn’t create the assets used and you didn’t attribute the sources of the ones didn’t alter or produce on your own. I think the argument is that It’d be like those knock-off studios using someone else’s footage in parts of their films without permission.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- austhrow743 4y ago
  There were many more people that thought copyright was good and right the entire time. They just silently torrent movies and video games instead.
AlecSchueler 4y ago
Why wouldn't the massive loss of jobs be an issue because of a technicality in IP law interpretation?
- gsatic 4y ago
  It's a stupid argument as dumb as worrying about China IP theft. After the ship has sailed. As to job losses, most ppl especially the prediction making buffoon class, have not worked with these systems long enough to understand a simple fact of life - the more complex system gets, the more bugs the system has. Not less. And then you need ppl to manually handle all those issues. These systems are overflowing with unhandled issues, just like prev hyped up tech like social media, crypto, the meta verse, self driving cars etc etc
  - AlecSchueler 4y ago
    Difference is I already see people in non-tech jobs using AI in their daily work. It's not just hype, it's already in use and creating value for people who live totally outside the tech hype bubble. Issues or not big changes are coming.
- noobermin 4y ago
  My point is we wouldn't have a loss of jobs because of this. If you had to generate your own data and not steal it from others, you'd have to hire people to generate it. The point is openAI, stability, and everyone else is taking advantage of basically training on "open" data on the internet they have access to. If you had to pay someone for their data to train on, the balance of power shifts to those who have skills worthwhile the AI people want to replace: writers, artists, scientists, developers, etc, and they would not charge cheapely, if at all. Another possibility is a situation similar to software companies today, they'd only give you basic data to train on, leaving the crown jewels under wraps.
- twelve40 4y ago
  it's not a technicality at all, it's large-scale theft of massive amounts of data that, depending on how it ends up, may rob its creators of any reward or even credit for creating it.
winternett 4y ago
I guarantee that a very dangerous era of misinformation is coming in order to influence/disrupt Ai... The ideal of it gathering information of the open web is silly and short sighted, just like self driving cars, the tech is in an state of infancy, yet somehow big companies are rushing to deploy beta testing in production environments to be first in the profit race... One can't predict how catastrophic this will get, but prepare yourself to trust what you see on the Internet and from Ai even less than you do now, and protect your intellectual property by not posting it to reddit, social media, or any other large-scale data sources because that's exactly how scholars end up screwing themselves out of jobs.

drstewart 4y ago

>This wouldn't be an issue if we actually recognized the theft of intellectual property that underlies training of these LLMs Suddenly people think copying things on the internet is theft again. What happened to "its just a copyright violation and nobody loses anything anyway, it's not theft!" when you're torrenting movies and video games? >The fair-use argument holds no water, and if we didn't have a broken government in the US, it certainly would doom these tools to being trained only on data they've generated themselves, which is how it should be. Well surely the "fixed" and "working" governments of Canada and the EU will take action against this promptly! Can you share the bills they've already passed that will doom these tools?

agentultra 4y ago
IANAL but these seem like two different accusations. Copying a movie and watching it in your own home and sharing it with your neighbour is different from redistributing a new film you claim is your own but is derived directly from the movie you downloaded; sure your changed the character names and dubbed over a few lines but you didn’t create the assets used and you didn’t attribute the sources of the ones didn’t alter or produce on your own. I think the argument is that It’d be like those knock-off studios using someone else’s footage in parts of their films without permission.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
austhrow743 4y ago
There were many more people that thought copyright was good and right the entire time. They just silently torrent movies and video games instead.

AlecSchueler 4y ago

Why wouldn't the massive loss of jobs be an issue because of a technicality in IP law interpretation?

gsatic 4y ago
It's a stupid argument as dumb as worrying about China IP theft. After the ship has sailed. As to job losses, most ppl especially the prediction making buffoon class, have not worked with these systems long enough to understand a simple fact of life - the more complex system gets, the more bugs the system has. Not less. And then you need ppl to manually handle all those issues. These systems are overflowing with unhandled issues, just like prev hyped up tech like social media, crypto, the meta verse, self driving cars etc etc
- AlecSchueler 4y ago
  Difference is I already see people in non-tech jobs using AI in their daily work. It's not just hype, it's already in use and creating value for people who live totally outside the tech hype bubble. Issues or not big changes are coming.
noobermin 4y ago
My point is we wouldn't have a loss of jobs because of this. If you had to generate your own data and not steal it from others, you'd have to hire people to generate it. The point is openAI, stability, and everyone else is taking advantage of basically training on "open" data on the internet they have access to. If you had to pay someone for their data to train on, the balance of power shifts to those who have skills worthwhile the AI people want to replace: writers, artists, scientists, developers, etc, and they would not charge cheapely, if at all. Another possibility is a situation similar to software companies today, they'd only give you basic data to train on, leaving the crown jewels under wraps.
twelve40 4y ago
it's not a technicality at all, it's large-scale theft of massive amounts of data that, depending on how it ends up, may rob its creators of any reward or even credit for creating it.

winternett 4y ago

I guarantee that a very dangerous era of misinformation is coming in order to influence/disrupt Ai... The ideal of it gathering information of the open web is silly and short sighted, just like self driving cars, the tech is in an state of infancy, yet somehow big companies are rushing to deploy beta testing in production environments to be first in the profit race... One can't predict how catastrophic this will get, but prepare yourself to trust what you see on the Internet and from Ai even less than you do now, and protect your intellectual property by not posting it to reddit, social media, or any other large-scale data sources because that's exactly how scholars end up screwing themselves out of jobs.