7 ms·

You as a human will also get your ass kicked in court if you are caught copying code from an open-source project without complying with the terms of the license

You as a human will also get your ass kicked in court if you are caught copying code from an open-source project without complying with the terms of the license. >What's the big difference you see between my learning and the automated process for the AI? The root of the problem is that machine learning community wants AI to be treated as a human when that's convenient for them and as a machine when it's not.

nomel 3y ago
I'm not suggesting the human or AI copies code. I'm talking about learning from the code that we read. There's a minimum sane syntax for every solution. At some point, you'll get what appears to be duplicates, but it's really just the fundamental logic of the problem being written down. Reading/writing more code, learning how to code, means you get better and identifying and writing that minimal logic. I guess my question is, where does learning end and copying begin? And, does this apply the same for humans and AI?
- snickerbockers 3y ago
  In the situations I've seen, it's actually copying the code line-for-line, not merely making something similar. TFA has it copying code from some guy's github page. >And, does this apply the same for humans and AI? It shouldn't. For one thing, the process referred to as "training" would be more accurately described as "tuning parameters" and has no proven similarities to human cognition. For another thing, we operate in what could be termed a "human-supremacist" legal system in which computer programs have no rights, so there absolutely could be laws and court rulings that are discriminatory against computer programs.
  - prng2021 3y ago
    “ In the situations I've seen, it's actually copying the code line-for-line, not merely making something similar.” Those are mistakes and they will become more rare as the AI improves. If the system was designed to store chunks of code and output a copy of existing ones, the vast majority of output we see would be exact copies.
    - snickerbockers 3y ago
      If it's a mistake then copilot (and by extension both Microsoft and everybody who uses copilot) needs to be held accountable when it makes a "mistake". It's not alright to steal code from open-source projects like this. This is what I was saying earlier about AI companies talking out of both sides of their mouth; when it's convenient for them they want AI to be treated as a human but whenever something goes wrong they talk about how it's not their fault, the system will get better at this, some problems are inevitable, etc. You don't get to have it both ways.
    - anonymousab 3y ago
      > Those are mistakes They are not just mistakes, they are mistakes at scale. Mistakes en masse. Thus, they are mistakes that should carry a heavy weight and a heavy culpability for the wreckless carelessness that brought them about. If I made a mistake and my software enabled mass media piracy, lawyers can, would and should come after me regardless of me or my software's pledge to learn and make those mistakes "more rare". Especially if I keep committing those mistakes and cover up for them by adding individual specific blacklists rather than making expensive systemic fixes.
      - prng2021 3y ago
        That’s fair. Humans are far from angels though. There’s countless copy/pasting of code from repos and stack overflow everyday with no attribution. Yes Copilot is generating code at large scale but that’s compared to a single developer.
    - nomel 3y ago
      If you turn the temperature down all the way, it could be a very reproducible string, bound by the statistics of the training. :)

nomel 3y ago

I'm not suggesting the human or AI copies code. I'm talking about learning from the code that we read. There's a minimum sane syntax for every solution. At some point, you'll get what appears to be duplicates, but it's really just the fundamental logic of the problem being written down. Reading/writing more code, learning how to code, means you get better and identifying and writing that minimal logic. I guess my question is, where does learning end and copying begin? And, does this apply the same for humans and AI?

snickerbockers 3y ago
In the situations I've seen, it's actually copying the code line-for-line, not merely making something similar. TFA has it copying code from some guy's github page. >And, does this apply the same for humans and AI? It shouldn't. For one thing, the process referred to as "training" would be more accurately described as "tuning parameters" and has no proven similarities to human cognition. For another thing, we operate in what could be termed a "human-supremacist" legal system in which computer programs have no rights, so there absolutely could be laws and court rulings that are discriminatory against computer programs.
- prng2021 3y ago
  “ In the situations I've seen, it's actually copying the code line-for-line, not merely making something similar.” Those are mistakes and they will become more rare as the AI improves. If the system was designed to store chunks of code and output a copy of existing ones, the vast majority of output we see would be exact copies.
  - snickerbockers 3y ago
    If it's a mistake then copilot (and by extension both Microsoft and everybody who uses copilot) needs to be held accountable when it makes a "mistake". It's not alright to steal code from open-source projects like this. This is what I was saying earlier about AI companies talking out of both sides of their mouth; when it's convenient for them they want AI to be treated as a human but whenever something goes wrong they talk about how it's not their fault, the system will get better at this, some problems are inevitable, etc. You don't get to have it both ways.
  - anonymousab 3y ago
    > Those are mistakes They are not just mistakes, they are mistakes at scale. Mistakes en masse. Thus, they are mistakes that should carry a heavy weight and a heavy culpability for the wreckless carelessness that brought them about. If I made a mistake and my software enabled mass media piracy, lawyers can, would and should come after me regardless of me or my software's pledge to learn and make those mistakes "more rare". Especially if I keep committing those mistakes and cover up for them by adding individual specific blacklists rather than making expensive systemic fixes.
    - prng2021 3y ago
      That’s fair. Humans are far from angels though. There’s countless copy/pasting of code from repos and stack overflow everyday with no attribution. Yes Copilot is generating code at large scale but that’s compared to a single developer.
  - nomel 3y ago
    If you turn the temperature down all the way, it could be a very reproducible string, bound by the statistics of the training. :)