3 ms·

I’d say no because comparing a human brain to chatGPT isn’t really fair nor am I sure they work in identical way. chatGPT can and have spat out raw content it w

I’d say no because comparing a human brain to chatGPT isn’t really fair nor am I sure they work in identical way. chatGPT can and have spat out raw content it was trained on. You understand the words you read in a book, you get the message out of it and are able to resonate and have thoughts. ChatGPT doesn’t, it just scrambles words based on statistics. You, writing content based on your influence should not be counted as copyright violation in my opinion. But giving some credit isn’t a bad practice either. If you did copy and paste the contents of the book and call it yours, then that should be counted as copyright violation (there are probably exceptions to this). I think what some people are currently against is openai (closed ai) scraping all kinds of content on the web and build a fantastic product like chatgpt without compensation or giving credit. They have essentially built an amazing product on the shoulders of lots of creators without them earning anything from it. Is that fair? I don’t think so. But that’s just me. This might be a bit irrelevant, but Github training their ai on repositories without consent or consideration of their license wasn’t cool either.

CrimsonRain 3y ago
You don't know enough about your own brain to say gpt is using different methods. > You understand the words you read in a book, Gpt understands better cause it can answer better when I ask about it. > you get the message out of it and are able to resonate and The bot can do this too. At least it can pretend to. We pretend too :) > have thoughts As in have hallucinations. It is very cool. Don't put your code out in the open and then blame others (inc ai) for reading it and training themselves. Reading is training. For human and ai.
- Alifatisk 3y ago
  > You don't know enough about your own brain to say gpt is using different methods. I said I wasn’t sure they worked in the same way, I did not state it as a fact. > Gpt understands better cause it can answer better when I ask about it. Assuming Gpt understands because it is able to answer you doesn’t seem logical to me. If I understand Gpt correctly, Gpt does not understand anything it says, it is just exceptionally good at convincing you it does. I don’t think thoughts and hallucinations are identical things. > Don't put your code out in the open and then blame others (inc ai) for reading it and training themselves. So licenses doesn’t matter at all if its out in the open?

CrimsonRain 3y ago

You don't know enough about your own brain to say gpt is using different methods. > You understand the words you read in a book, Gpt understands better cause it can answer better when I ask about it. > you get the message out of it and are able to resonate and The bot can do this too. At least it can pretend to. We pretend too :) > have thoughts As in have hallucinations. It is very cool. Don't put your code out in the open and then blame others (inc ai) for reading it and training themselves. Reading is training. For human and ai.

Alifatisk 3y ago
> You don't know enough about your own brain to say gpt is using different methods. I said I wasn’t sure they worked in the same way, I did not state it as a fact. > Gpt understands better cause it can answer better when I ask about it. Assuming Gpt understands because it is able to answer you doesn’t seem logical to me. If I understand Gpt correctly, Gpt does not understand anything it says, it is just exceptionally good at convincing you it does. I don’t think thoughts and hallucinations are identical things. > Don't put your code out in the open and then blame others (inc ai) for reading it and training themselves. So licenses doesn’t matter at all if its out in the open?