6 ms·

Isn't it funny how humans are allowed to keep copyrighted material in their minds, but A.I. isn't?

lewhoo 3y ago
It is even more funny to equate objects with humans and give them the same rights and privileges. Can't wait for AI to gain parenthood leave after a copy.
DangitBobby 3y ago
Let's all just pretend AI is not about to fundamentally shake things up.
waboremo 3y ago
AI doesn't have a mind.
- judge2020 3y ago
  It mimics it in all the ways that are relevant to the request to "cite your sources". Speak to someone on the street about the moon landing and they probably won't be able to cite the exact author and textbook that told them "the moon landing happened in 1969". Based on the article, it seems citing that source would be required of chatgpt under such regulation.
  - orwin 3y ago
    No. I thought it was clear: openAI devs are asked to disclose their training data. If the prompt say it's sources or not isn't present. By the way: a gdpr exception exist for AI and research projects. The lawmakers at the time listened to us (I worked for a big data Paas that mostly worked with universities and BigCorp R&D at the time) and were generous as the baked-in exception was pretty much word for word what was asked, because it was in good faith. Actors like OpenAI risk poisoning the well, or spoil the good apples, or whatever image you want to use. This is not much. It isn't asked that they Gpl their code, or that they put a 'source' under each response. They don't have to change anything to their tech. They don't have to disclose their fine-tuning either. Just, make a list of the datasources you used, and publish it.
  - voltaireodactyl 3y ago
    Citing sources isn’t usually called for unless trying to present something as one’s own work — man on the street questions generally don’t rise to that standard. They also lack a profit motive. Citing sources is also, traditionally, a key method of separating the work you built upon from the work you yourself derived/created/expanded. If one does not cite their sources, there is no way to establish if the presented work is their own, or copy+pasting someone else’s.
  - gumballindie 3y ago
    AI is neither a person nor intelligent. It’s software and its owners should follow tue same rules as everyone else.
Barrin92 3y ago
No because AI doesn't have a mind or any other benefits associated with legal or natural personhood. Anthropomorphic delusions about what is in reality a software service need to stop because at this point their primary function is apparently to make excuses for for-profit companies to avoid regulations. Also as a side note regulation never concerns what anyone has in their mind because that is by definition an inaccessible private matter, regulation starts when you try to bring a product to the public.
- xyzzy4747 3y ago
  Is the human brain not a biological network of neurons, containing a lot of copyrighted material? >Also as a side note regulation never concerns what anyone has in their mind because that is by definition an inaccessible private matter Well technically A.I. controlled by private companies is also a private matter. I don't think anyone understands what's in the countless inscrutable floating point matrices anyways.
  - jeremyjh 3y ago
    They've invited the public to extract the contents of the "mind", by asking it questions. Its not private anymore.
    - xyzzy4747 3y ago
      True but it’s not like a database where you can see all the information there. It’s just a bunch of numbers and matrices.
  - z3phyr 3y ago
    > Is the human brain not a biological network of neurons, containing a lot of copyrighted material? In which file format is the material in the brain stored? How is it compressed? What is the memory model? How is it computed? We don't know much about how the brain computes actually, so making a claim that the brain maps 1-1 with my mechanical calculator is a stretch.
- fswd 3y ago
marcosdumay 3y ago
This is not about what an AI keeps in its mind, it's about what they get out from their mouths.
George83728 3y ago
[dead]
mirekrusin 3y ago
If you invent some lossy compression, does it mean you can start using copyrighted work because copyright doesn't apply to you anymore? What about adding probabilistic querying support to it, does it change anything?
- XorNot 3y ago
  Copyright infringement happens when you reproduce copyright works - i.e. if I analyze digits of Pi get a Disney cartoon out by chance (which statistically, is in there somewhere), I'm still infringing copyright (if I publish it) on Disney despite the fact that nothing they produced was ever included in the input, and Pi itself both contains theoretically anything eventually.
  - erehweb 3y ago
    Nit - I don't think your last clause is true. E.g. the truth of "pi contains a sequence of 1000 consecutive sevens" is unknown, afaik.
- tick_tock_tick 3y ago
  > If you invent some lossy compression, does it mean you can start using copyrighted work because copyright doesn't apply to you anymore? If it's lossy enough absolutely!
nequo 3y ago
> Isn’t it funny how humans are allowed to keep copyrighted material in their minds You’re not allowed to take it out of your mind and sell it as your own product without permission from the copyright holder though.
- ajmurmann 3y ago
  But I'm allowed to take heavy inspiration from them. If I painted something imitating the style of Picasso that would be perfectly legal.
  - dotancohen 3y ago
    Yet if you painted something imitating the style of Mickey Mouse that would not be legal. The law specifies limits and restrictions even for paintings completely of your own imagination too.
    - JieJie 3y ago
      https://comicsforall269084760.wordpress.com/2020/08/23/mickey-rat/ https://comicsforall269084760.wordpress.com/2020/08/23/micke...
    - ajmurmann 3y ago
      I can absolutely do a painting in the style of popular Disney shows. What I cannot do is use their characters. That's a significant difference.
      - dotancohen 3y ago
        Mickey Mouse is in fact a Disney character, not a show.
        ajmurmann 3y ago
        And a character isn't an art style.
z3phyr 3y ago
You are assuming that AI exists in the same scope. Its like calling airplanes "artificial birds" or AB, and then projecting bird related things to airplane. "AI" is a software model which uses applied statistics to generate data from a larger set of data. We do not know much about how the brain actually computes, and assuming such is just fantasy. It might be the same or it might be different.
- kken 3y ago
  I like the analogy, it nicely sets the perspective.

It is even more funny to equate objects with humans and give them the same rights and privileges. Can't wait for AI to gain parenthood leave after a copy.

DangitBobby 3y ago

Let's all just pretend AI is not about to fundamentally shake things up.

waboremo 3y ago

AI doesn't have a mind.

judge2020 3y ago
It mimics it in all the ways that are relevant to the request to "cite your sources". Speak to someone on the street about the moon landing and they probably won't be able to cite the exact author and textbook that told them "the moon landing happened in 1969". Based on the article, it seems citing that source would be required of chatgpt under such regulation.
- orwin 3y ago
  No. I thought it was clear: openAI devs are asked to disclose their training data. If the prompt say it's sources or not isn't present. By the way: a gdpr exception exist for AI and research projects. The lawmakers at the time listened to us (I worked for a big data Paas that mostly worked with universities and BigCorp R&D at the time) and were generous as the baked-in exception was pretty much word for word what was asked, because it was in good faith. Actors like OpenAI risk poisoning the well, or spoil the good apples, or whatever image you want to use. This is not much. It isn't asked that they Gpl their code, or that they put a 'source' under each response. They don't have to change anything to their tech. They don't have to disclose their fine-tuning either. Just, make a list of the datasources you used, and publish it.
- voltaireodactyl 3y ago
  Citing sources isn’t usually called for unless trying to present something as one’s own work — man on the street questions generally don’t rise to that standard. They also lack a profit motive. Citing sources is also, traditionally, a key method of separating the work you built upon from the work you yourself derived/created/expanded. If one does not cite their sources, there is no way to establish if the presented work is their own, or copy+pasting someone else’s.
- gumballindie 3y ago
  AI is neither a person nor intelligent. It’s software and its owners should follow tue same rules as everyone else.

Barrin92 3y ago

No because AI doesn't have a mind or any other benefits associated with legal or natural personhood. Anthropomorphic delusions about what is in reality a software service need to stop because at this point their primary function is apparently to make excuses for for-profit companies to avoid regulations. Also as a side note regulation never concerns what anyone has in their mind because that is by definition an inaccessible private matter, regulation starts when you try to bring a product to the public.

xyzzy4747 3y ago
Is the human brain not a biological network of neurons, containing a lot of copyrighted material? >Also as a side note regulation never concerns what anyone has in their mind because that is by definition an inaccessible private matter Well technically A.I. controlled by private companies is also a private matter. I don't think anyone understands what's in the countless inscrutable floating point matrices anyways.
- jeremyjh 3y ago
  They've invited the public to extract the contents of the "mind", by asking it questions. Its not private anymore.
  - xyzzy4747 3y ago
    True but it’s not like a database where you can see all the information there. It’s just a bunch of numbers and matrices.
- z3phyr 3y ago
  > Is the human brain not a biological network of neurons, containing a lot of copyrighted material? In which file format is the material in the brain stored? How is it compressed? What is the memory model? How is it computed? We don't know much about how the brain computes actually, so making a claim that the brain maps 1-1 with my mechanical calculator is a stretch.
fswd 3y ago

marcosdumay 3y ago

This is not about what an AI keeps in its mind, it's about what they get out from their mouths.

George83728 3y ago

[dead]

mirekrusin 3y ago

If you invent some lossy compression, does it mean you can start using copyrighted work because copyright doesn't apply to you anymore? What about adding probabilistic querying support to it, does it change anything?

XorNot 3y ago
Copyright infringement happens when you reproduce copyright works - i.e. if I analyze digits of Pi get a Disney cartoon out by chance (which statistically, is in there somewhere), I'm still infringing copyright (if I publish it) on Disney despite the fact that nothing they produced was ever included in the input, and Pi itself both contains theoretically anything eventually.
- erehweb 3y ago
  Nit - I don't think your last clause is true. E.g. the truth of "pi contains a sequence of 1000 consecutive sevens" is unknown, afaik.
tick_tock_tick 3y ago
> If you invent some lossy compression, does it mean you can start using copyrighted work because copyright doesn't apply to you anymore? If it's lossy enough absolutely!

nequo 3y ago

> Isn’t it funny how humans are allowed to keep copyrighted material in their minds You’re not allowed to take it out of your mind and sell it as your own product without permission from the copyright holder though.

ajmurmann 3y ago
But I'm allowed to take heavy inspiration from them. If I painted something imitating the style of Picasso that would be perfectly legal.
- dotancohen 3y ago
  Yet if you painted something imitating the style of Mickey Mouse that would not be legal. The law specifies limits and restrictions even for paintings completely of your own imagination too.
  - JieJie 3y ago
    https://comicsforall269084760.wordpress.com/2020/08/23/mickey-rat/ https://comicsforall269084760.wordpress.com/2020/08/23/micke...
  - ajmurmann 3y ago
    I can absolutely do a painting in the style of popular Disney shows. What I cannot do is use their characters. That's a significant difference.
    - dotancohen 3y ago
      Mickey Mouse is in fact a Disney character, not a show.
      - ajmurmann 3y ago
        And a character isn't an art style.

z3phyr 3y ago

You are assuming that AI exists in the same scope. Its like calling airplanes "artificial birds" or AB, and then projecting bird related things to airplane. "AI" is a software model which uses applied statistics to generate data from a larger set of data. We do not know much about how the brain actually computes, and assuming such is just fantasy. It might be the same or it might be different.

kken 3y ago
I like the analogy, it nicely sets the perspective.