3 ms·

When I read any of your comments, a part of it stays in mind, forever. Does that mean I have to pay you royalties for thinking about it or mentioning it? I don

When I read any of your comments, a part of it stays in mind, forever. Does that mean I have to pay you royalties for thinking about it or mentioning it? I don't think so. GPT is like a primitive intelligence that read a large part of the web and got influenced by it, nobody deserves compensation or consultation for the public data it was trained on. If you put something on a public internet page, you should expect that other beings, artificial or not, are going to get influenced by it.

qgin 3y ago
It’s not immoral or unethical to digest information, but the difference is when a computer can do that digesting of information the scale is very different than if a human does it and it blows up the incentives for people to create content in the first place. In the most extreme version, no human writing would be read or seen by other humans, it would be all fuel for the machine intelligence. If that it to be our future, we have to figure out how to rearrange incentives so that humans continue to be motivated to create the content that feeds the machine intelligence or the whole system falls apart.
Out_of_Characte 3y ago
Does that mean I have to pay you royalties for thinking about it or mentioning it? Yes, if HN were to post copyrighted work that only they could spread, then you would be liable. In the same trend, any patents that HN comments share should not be redistributed/sold by you. Chatgpt circumvents copyright law in a way that is hard to detect. How many sentences of moby dick does it take to prove chatgpt is plagiarising other peoples protected works?
- nradov 3y ago
  That is mostly not how US copyright or patent law works. Your claim just wrong. It is legal to spread limited amounts of copyrighted material under fair use, and anyone can create and sell new content based on copyrighted material as long as it is sufficiently transformative. It's also totally legal to print out a bunch of patents and redistribute those in a book or whatever (except on certain secret patents which aren't relevant here). You can't copyright a patent filing. The only legal restrictions are on building and selling things that infringe on patent claims.
lm28469 3y ago
Ok but really all they had to do is add a fucking popup to ask for consent, detail what they store and how they use it If this is "backward" and "foolish" then I'm a caveman > If you put something on a public internet page, you should expect that other beings, artificial or not, are going to get influenced by it. Well yes, and that's exactly why we have laws and regulation Example: you can't just use "open source" code however you please, you have to abide by the license

qgin 3y ago

It’s not immoral or unethical to digest information, but the difference is when a computer can do that digesting of information the scale is very different than if a human does it and it blows up the incentives for people to create content in the first place. In the most extreme version, no human writing would be read or seen by other humans, it would be all fuel for the machine intelligence. If that it to be our future, we have to figure out how to rearrange incentives so that humans continue to be motivated to create the content that feeds the machine intelligence or the whole system falls apart.

Out_of_Characte 3y ago

Does that mean I have to pay you royalties for thinking about it or mentioning it? Yes, if HN were to post copyrighted work that only they could spread, then you would be liable. In the same trend, any patents that HN comments share should not be redistributed/sold by you. Chatgpt circumvents copyright law in a way that is hard to detect. How many sentences of moby dick does it take to prove chatgpt is plagiarising other peoples protected works?

nradov 3y ago
That is mostly not how US copyright or patent law works. Your claim just wrong. It is legal to spread limited amounts of copyrighted material under fair use, and anyone can create and sell new content based on copyrighted material as long as it is sufficiently transformative. It's also totally legal to print out a bunch of patents and redistribute those in a book or whatever (except on certain secret patents which aren't relevant here). You can't copyright a patent filing. The only legal restrictions are on building and selling things that infringe on patent claims.

lm28469 3y ago

Ok but really all they had to do is add a fucking popup to ask for consent, detail what they store and how they use it If this is "backward" and "foolish" then I'm a caveman > If you put something on a public internet page, you should expect that other beings, artificial or not, are going to get influenced by it. Well yes, and that's exactly why we have laws and regulation Example: you can't just use "open source" code however you please, you have to abide by the license