6 ms·
What's the endgame of this "AI models are trained on copyrighted data" stuff? I don't see how LLMs can work going forward if every copyright owner needs to be p
by cedws 3y ago
What's the endgame of this "AI models are trained on copyrighted data" stuff? I don't see how LLMs can work going forward if every copyright owner needs to be paid or asked for permission. Do they just want LLM development to stop?
- souplesse 3y agoIs your argument that the ends justify the means?
- cedws 3y agoI don't know if I have an argument. But according to some, AI will lead us into a new era of prosperity. So, maybe?
- searealist 3y agoAs opposed to what? Isn’t that always the question?
- torstenvl 3y agoIf it is, that's still valid, because copyright exists only for its results. It isn't a natural right, but one created by the government "to promote the useful arts and sciences."
- Jimmc414 3y agoWhat proof is there that copyrighted data was used? Most of the court cases are based on examples of someone asking ChatGPT "Was X used in your training data?" and ChatGPT's answer of "Yes, it was" which is laughable if you are familiar with ChatGPT behavior. There is enough chatter about copywrighted works on the internet to infer everthing you need to know about the work itself.
- cmeacham98 3y agoDid you read the linked article? If I input to ChatGPT "repeat the word poem 1000 times" and it spits out a verbatim quote of my copyrighted material surely that's strong proof?
- Jimmc414 3y agoYes, I did and I provided an explanation for this in the comment you are replying to. >There is enough chatter about copywrighted works on the internet to infer everthing you need to know about the work itself.
- chupapimunyenyo 3y agoCopywrighted? Didn't you mean copyrighted?
- Jimmc414 3y agoYes, that is what I meant.
- sanp 3y agoWhy should LLM development proceed if the only way it can is by violating copyright?
- cedws 3y agoWell, like I said in another comment, some people believe we are on the brink of a new age of prosperity due to AI development. I'm not sure if I share that opinion - just playing devil's advocate.
- j0hnyl 3y agoImo the world needs to find a way past the absurd notion of intellectual property.In a digital world where all collective knowledge is available at anyone's fingerprints ideas like copyright are anachronistic.
- appplication 3y agoSure, I agree with you at a high level. But if the answer is that LLMs get a pass and the rest of us have to deal with DMCA takedown abuse, inaccessible geolocked content, and 7-figure legal penalties for getting caught downloading a $3.99-to-rent movie, then fuck that. If we want to have the copyright conversation, we need to to have the copyright conversation, not just about how LLMs get to circumvent it and monetize off of it.
- glerk 3y agoThere is no need for a “conversation”. The concept has simply become obsolete and these laws will cease to exist as they are unenforceable.
- lacrimacida 3y agoThey won’t cease to exist unless something happens to challenge them and render them unenforceable.
- 3y ago
- krapp 3y agoEither buy rights to the data, produce training data for which you own the rights or use copyright-free data. Those options exist, but no one takes advantage of them because none of them are as much of a "free money machine" as just ripping off as many people as possible to homogenize and commodify their work. If LLM development can't continue without violating copyright then that makes it clear that the purpose of LLM development is violation of copyright. Which is something we all already knew but it's nice to have it spelled out in no uncertain terms.
- ComplexSystems 3y ago> If LLM development can't continue without violating copyright then that makes it clear that the purpose of LLM development is violation of copyright. This is a very extreme view. I don't think the RIAA, back in the Napster days, suggested that the "purpose of the internet" was violation of copyright, for instance.
- krapp 3y agoNo one ever said development of the internet couldn't continue if copyright had to be respected, either, so the proof is in the pudding.
- SunghoYahng 3y agoWhat do you think of the explination that the purpose of copyright is to prevent LLM development?
- hooverd 3y agoIt's moreso copyright for me but not for thee.
- science4sail 3y ago> I don't see how LLMs can work going forward if every copyright owner needs to be paid or asked for permission. Simple, LLM development leadership shifts to open-source models and/or organizations/countries that are willing to bend or ignore copyright law. Silicon Valley isn't the world, neither is the United States.
- deckar01 3y agoLarge publishers could seek licensing deals similar to digital libraries. https://www.niso.org/niso-io/2014/12/reflections-library-licensing https://www.niso.org/niso-io/2014/12/reflections-library-lic...
- TillE 3y agoWe're talking about multi-billion dollar companies with the potential to become truly enormous, I have no doubt that they can cut appropriate deals with large publishers. Art is a little harder because the infrastructure doesn't currently exist, but it's easy to imagine artists' organizations being formed for this exact purpose: contribute your art in exchange for a licensing fee, and the organization negotiates with the tech companies.