5 ms·

Question, do you think this has to do with copyrighted information being in the models ? I know you might not care but I wonder if Google is operating of accoun

Question, do you think this has to do with copyrighted information being in the models ? I know you might not care but I wonder if Google is operating of accounts from the internet while OpenAI has actually ingested the books ?

frankohn 3y ago
I don't know but I think google bard had access to the book's content as well because it mentioned correctly some characters and some places I didn't mention in my question.
- amf12 3y ago
  That's exactly what LLMs are good at. Cross-referencing information from across the training data. The response could contain information that you did not specifically refer to but is relevant and/or related. It doesn't even imply that the LLMs had access to the book's content.
buildbot 3y ago
No. A blog post on the internet is also copyrighted! Google has probably the largest collection of digitized books as well. They have no reason not to. ML networks have been trained on copyrighted data since before 2012.
- munificent 3y ago
  > They have no reason not to. Ethics?
  - buildbot 3y ago
    Personally, I have no ethical issue with it. This response is copyrighted, all rights reserved. But you can still read and gather information from it. Your computer still stores a copy of it when you reload the page. Theft? Infringement? I think not. Is taking the character count of a book copyright infringement? Why is the math behind an LLM different?
    - munificent 3y ago
      > Is taking the character count of a book copyright infringement? Why is the math behind an LLM different? I hate arguments like this. Intent, scale, and quantity matter. If I gently toss a small piece of lead at you, I'm not trying to kill you. If I accelerate it using a rifle, I am. No, taking the character count of a book is not copyright infringement. Neither is quoting the word "the". Or "the worst". But, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair." definitely is. The fact that you have to draw a line and exercise some amount of judgement to determine which actions are prohibited does not mean the line doesn't exist. Likewise, the social context and emergent consequences of a policy matter too. If LLMs were a niche technology used by a couple of fringe weirdos, who cares, go nuts. But since LLMs are owned by large tech companies and are being used to generate incredible amounts of revenue, they are enacting a large-scale transfer of wealth to the rich whose value is largely derived from the labor of the creative people who authored the data the model is trained on without any consent on their part. How you can't see that that is somehow different from taking the word count of a file is beyond me.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    Perhaps it would be a reason if they actually thought it was unethical.

frankohn 3y ago

I don't know but I think google bard had access to the book's content as well because it mentioned correctly some characters and some places I didn't mention in my question.

amf12 3y ago
That's exactly what LLMs are good at. Cross-referencing information from across the training data. The response could contain information that you did not specifically refer to but is relevant and/or related. It doesn't even imply that the LLMs had access to the book's content.

buildbot 3y ago

No. A blog post on the internet is also copyrighted! Google has probably the largest collection of digitized books as well. They have no reason not to. ML networks have been trained on copyrighted data since before 2012.

munificent 3y ago
> They have no reason not to. Ethics?
- buildbot 3y ago
  Personally, I have no ethical issue with it. This response is copyrighted, all rights reserved. But you can still read and gather information from it. Your computer still stores a copy of it when you reload the page. Theft? Infringement? I think not. Is taking the character count of a book copyright infringement? Why is the math behind an LLM different?
  - munificent 3y ago
    > Is taking the character count of a book copyright infringement? Why is the math behind an LLM different? I hate arguments like this. Intent, scale, and quantity matter. If I gently toss a small piece of lead at you, I'm not trying to kill you. If I accelerate it using a rifle, I am. No, taking the character count of a book is not copyright infringement. Neither is quoting the word "the". Or "the worst". But, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair." definitely is. The fact that you have to draw a line and exercise some amount of judgement to determine which actions are prohibited does not mean the line doesn't exist. Likewise, the social context and emergent consequences of a policy matter too. If LLMs were a niche technology used by a couple of fringe weirdos, who cares, go nuts. But since LLMs are owned by large tech companies and are being used to generate incredible amounts of revenue, they are enacting a large-scale transfer of wealth to the rich whose value is largely derived from the labor of the creative people who authored the data the model is trained on without any consent on their part. How you can't see that that is somehow different from taking the word count of a file is beyond me.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  Perhaps it would be a reason if they actually thought it was unethical.