4 ms·

Interesting question but sadly I am in no position to answer it. I think there are probably issues to address with scraping it blindly: - Can Reddit imprint i

Interesting question but sadly I am in no position to answer it. I think there are probably issues to address with scraping it blindly: - Can Reddit imprint its data somehow? A watermark? - Can Reddit prove that certain type of information appeared on Reddit first and thus that serves as proof its data was used without authorization? If OpenAI can't work around this, I'm not sure they would be willing to cross any lines in terms of copyright, they've already done it with ChatGPT and I am guessing rules are only going to get stricter on this topic.

comfypotato 3y ago
I think the bottom line is that Microsoft’s (and thus other for-profit AI initiatives) stance is that any and all data is fair game regardless of license or authorization. This results, in their opinion, from the fact that the AI alters the data, changes the output, and is otherwise “inspired” by the data in the same way an artist might be inspired by another without copyright infringement.
- nologic01 3y ago
  This sounds very dodgy. Will somebody be checking the degree of such "data alteration" and verify that the "AI" is actually inspired rather than copying? To me this feels like its opening up the door for the elimination of copyright as any algorithmic layer interjected between scrapped data and end users could claim to be "inspired".
  - comfypotato 3y ago
    Welcome to the discussion lol. People have already provided examples of copilot producing niche code verbatim thereby proving their intuition incorrect. It’s a whole mess that will take years to be cleaned up by new legal conventions.
- Jevon23 3y ago
  If my compiler was “inspired” by leaked Windows source code and altered it into a new form then I think their opinions on the matter would be very different.
  - comfypotato 3y ago
    Not a great example: if Apple’s code leaked, theoretically they wouldn’t include it in the training as it’s not supposed to be seen by the public. If it’s public you can be inspired by it (so their logic goes).
dontupvoteme 3y ago
The true malicious, and probably effective, approach is to silently poison outputs if you suspect automated behaviour. These large language model things might be useful there. Or the old school NLP stuff.

comfypotato 3y ago

I think the bottom line is that Microsoft’s (and thus other for-profit AI initiatives) stance is that any and all data is fair game regardless of license or authorization. This results, in their opinion, from the fact that the AI alters the data, changes the output, and is otherwise “inspired” by the data in the same way an artist might be inspired by another without copyright infringement.

nologic01 3y ago
This sounds very dodgy. Will somebody be checking the degree of such "data alteration" and verify that the "AI" is actually inspired rather than copying? To me this feels like its opening up the door for the elimination of copyright as any algorithmic layer interjected between scrapped data and end users could claim to be "inspired".
- comfypotato 3y ago
  Welcome to the discussion lol. People have already provided examples of copilot producing niche code verbatim thereby proving their intuition incorrect. It’s a whole mess that will take years to be cleaned up by new legal conventions.
Jevon23 3y ago
If my compiler was “inspired” by leaked Windows source code and altered it into a new form then I think their opinions on the matter would be very different.
- comfypotato 3y ago
  Not a great example: if Apple’s code leaked, theoretically they wouldn’t include it in the training as it’s not supposed to be seen by the public. If it’s public you can be inspired by it (so their logic goes).

dontupvoteme 3y ago

The true malicious, and probably effective, approach is to silently poison outputs if you suspect automated behaviour. These large language model things might be useful there. Or the old school NLP stuff.