3 ms·
The exclusive right? No. The right? Possibly. Since no court has ruled on the latter question yet, let’s do a choose your own adventure: Say that OpenAI train
by zarzavat 3y ago
The exclusive right? No. The right? Possibly.
Since no court has ruled on the latter question yet, let’s do a choose your own adventure:
Say that OpenAI trained a language detection model. The output of the model is simply a single vector that indicates which language that the input was written in. During training they use your copyrighted code as training data.
Would you consider that to be infringement?
1) If yes: consider instead of using fancy and scary mathematics like “neural networks”, it is just tabulating and counting keywords. Is it still infringement?
1) If no: what’s different about a neural network that outputs code, vs a neural network that outputs a single vector? Perhaps it’s the output that is infringing, not the weights?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- slim 3y agoI think neither I nor openai should have any exclusive rights and that would lead to the best outcome for humanity. the problem is sam altman is already lobbying to restrict access to ai (which maybe indicates that his lawyers think that they might not have exclusive rights)
- regularfry 3y agoHe's lobbying to build a moat around assets he already has. Rights don't come into it.
- saagarjha 3y agoSeems similar to, say, a device that does radiocarbon dating of a painting and prints the result and one that takes a picture?
- dweinus 3y ago> consider instead of using fancy and scary mathematics like “neural networks”, it is just tabulating and counting keywords. Is it still infringement? I've seen this analogy before. A NN, especially an LLM, is very different in method and outcome. If counting keywords allowed me to replicate copyrighted material, it would probably not be fair use. IANAL, but I imagine the fact that a NN can replicate or compete with the original work makes a difference.