2 ms·
I think of LLM’s as a vast digital information landscape, vaguely analogous to walking through World of Warcraft, except at a higher dimensionality of existence
by mensetmanusman 3y ago
I think of LLM’s as a vast digital information landscape, vaguely analogous to walking through World of Warcraft, except at a higher dimensionality of existence.
A photographer doesn’t create nature, the subjects, the architecture, the universe, the billions of R&D behind the silicon sensors, etc., but they create the situation and push the button.
Creating the situation, I.e. drawing from the near infinite of possibilities, is analogous to prompting.
- some_random 3y agoPeople have enforced copyright over photos, the Eiffel tower's lights are copyrighted, some tattoo artists try to enforce copyright over their work, and I'm pretty sure you can't just take a photo of someone's painting and sell it. Any photo of a pine tree is the exclusive copyright of the photographer, nature can't enforce copyright. A photo of a pine tree generated from hundreds of copyrighted photos of pine trees is a completely different question, I think your argument is too reductive.
- mensetmanusman 3y agoYou can not take a photo of someone’s art or likeness and sell it in many cases (or if abuse etc.), this is true and should be true of LLMs. In this case the photography analogy holds. For the case of observing copyrighted photos (not directly storing indefinitely) and generalizing a pine tree from that data, I think that is fine: -assume we believe and rule it is not fine, then we will just allow huge companies to generate their own data sets and they will own this space moving forward (would require google maps levels of investment). Also, we wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between illegal SD output versus clean FAANG output without extremely draconian measures.