3 ms·

Isn't using someone else's work without attribution the whole point of (modern) AI? I don't get any attribution for the code or messages I wrote that GPT4 was

Isn't using someone else's work without attribution the whole point of (modern) AI? I don't get any attribution for the code or messages I wrote that GPT4 was trained on, and there are multiple examples of LLMs regurgitating people's code (even copyrighted code) without attribution. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33226515 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33226515

nehslajs 3y ago
Excellent point. The training dataset is just upstream of the fine-tuning step but both are supplying vital data to the whole pipeline.
Maxious 3y ago
thieves are never rogues amongst themselves
danmur 3y ago
Hahaha you beat me to it. Still rude though. Rude on rude.
brookst 3y ago
Well by that standard how many of us can say we learned to code without seeing anyone else’s code? And how many of us “regurgitate” copyrighted code? I don’t check my own output, and across decades of writing, odds are good I’ve produced verbatim copies of some copyrighted code. Point being, there’s a legit conversation to be had about AI training data, but it’s not the same conversation as humans intentionally creating a derivative work. I think it’s too reductive to insist those are the same thing.
- eigenket 3y ago
  The link I provided shows copilot regurgitating a 21 line function pretty much exactly. The comments are changed from //comment style to /*comment*/ style and some of the variables have been renamed, but thats about it. I can say with pretty high confidence I have never plagarised anything to that level, and I think the same is true of most human programmers.
tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago
As a university lecturer you don’t get attribution for everything your students do after they graduate. I fail to see how anyone with your viewpoint isn’t flat out being intellectually dishonest. It is understood that it is both (usually) legal and ethical to not attribute someone when they teach someone an abstract skill set which they use to develop something “new”. LLMs inarguably bring us closer to reaching that point without implicating human effort in the creation process. “You did it with a computer, so copyright!”is such a naive and frankly wasteful take as it threatens to forego massive societal advances in favour of intellectual property rights. What sort of society is that!? An overly American one, that’s for sure.
- eigenket 3y ago
  The link I provided shows copilot regurgitating a 21 line function pretty much exactly. The comments are changed from //comment style to /*comment*/ style and some of the variables have been renamed, but thats about it. This isn't a student learning from a teacher, its a student copy-and-pasting an answer they found. It isn't learning an abstract skill set which it is using to develop something new, its literally just copying the code. It is utterly dishonest to make the comparison you do in your comment.

nehslajs 3y ago

Excellent point. The training dataset is just upstream of the fine-tuning step but both are supplying vital data to the whole pipeline.

Maxious 3y ago

thieves are never rogues amongst themselves

danmur 3y ago

Hahaha you beat me to it. Still rude though. Rude on rude.

brookst 3y ago

Well by that standard how many of us can say we learned to code without seeing anyone else’s code? And how many of us “regurgitate” copyrighted code? I don’t check my own output, and across decades of writing, odds are good I’ve produced verbatim copies of some copyrighted code. Point being, there’s a legit conversation to be had about AI training data, but it’s not the same conversation as humans intentionally creating a derivative work. I think it’s too reductive to insist those are the same thing.

eigenket 3y ago
The link I provided shows copilot regurgitating a 21 line function pretty much exactly. The comments are changed from //comment style to /*comment*/ style and some of the variables have been renamed, but thats about it. I can say with pretty high confidence I have never plagarised anything to that level, and I think the same is true of most human programmers.

tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago

As a university lecturer you don’t get attribution for everything your students do after they graduate. I fail to see how anyone with your viewpoint isn’t flat out being intellectually dishonest. It is understood that it is both (usually) legal and ethical to not attribute someone when they teach someone an abstract skill set which they use to develop something “new”. LLMs inarguably bring us closer to reaching that point without implicating human effort in the creation process. “You did it with a computer, so copyright!”is such a naive and frankly wasteful take as it threatens to forego massive societal advances in favour of intellectual property rights. What sort of society is that!? An overly American one, that’s for sure.

eigenket 3y ago
The link I provided shows copilot regurgitating a 21 line function pretty much exactly. The comments are changed from //comment style to /*comment*/ style and some of the variables have been renamed, but thats about it. This isn't a student learning from a teacher, its a student copy-and-pasting an answer they found. It isn't learning an abstract skill set which it is using to develop something new, its literally just copying the code. It is utterly dishonest to make the comparison you do in your comment.