3 ms·

LLMs don't do that unprompted, though. So prompting an AI to invent something and then file for a patent for the invention is comparable to using a template for

by qayxc 3y ago

LLMs don't do that unprompted, though. So prompting an AI to invent something and then file for a patent for the invention is comparable to using a template for the patent application. They don't have that kind of agency (yet).

feanaro 3y ago
So if we package up AI into an autonomous loop, so that it can file for a patent unprompted, that is sufficient precondition to allow patents to be assigned to such a loop?
- cyanydeez 3y ago
  Yes, the person who packages up a loop to make patents, get a patent for that loop and anything else it produces, right? Move this to the "Autonomous vehicle" line of thought. IF we accept the risks of a vehicle without a driver, how do we accomodate the _culpability_ of that risk? Same thing in patent law. Someone needs to hold that "culpability". Maybe there'll be a robust future systems of laws that assigns the correct weightings, but it's not today.
- mensetmanusman 3y ago
  no, because they don't have access to a credit card to pay the fees.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    Corporate bank accounts are a thing, at least one country considers bitcoin to be legal tender, and 1.7 billion humans had no back account as recently as 2018.
- qayxc 3y ago
  Interesting question. I guess that's one of the upcoming challenges for the entire legal system when it comes to AI. One fundamental problem with such approach would of course be money. The AI would need to have a means of paying the fees and the USPTO declaration (37 CFR 1.63) may also prove difficult for an AI - "wilfulness" w.r.t. to false statements comes to mind. But that's a whole new can of worms I don't want to open.
IanCal 3y ago
You don't have to tell them to do something specific. You can tell them to generate ideas, pick one and go from there.
- ben_w 3y ago
  While this is an increasingly arbitrary delineation as more things fill the previously empty gap between people and things[0], I'd count that as a human using a tool. [0] except for all the racism and sexism and slavey and arguments about animal rights and if unborn foetuses are people etc.
ben_w 3y ago
While true, that doesn't really matter. Prompts can be any experiential input, and it's trivial to turn them into agents. Even as high level controllers for robots, demonstrated by at least Agility with Digit and Boston Dynamic with Spot.
- cyanydeez 3y ago
  So in reality whats being patented _is the prompt that get the AI a patent_

by qayxc 3y ago

feanaro 3y ago

So if we package up AI into an autonomous loop, so that it can file for a patent unprompted, that is sufficient precondition to allow patents to be assigned to such a loop?

cyanydeez 3y ago
Yes, the person who packages up a loop to make patents, get a patent for that loop and anything else it produces, right? Move this to the "Autonomous vehicle" line of thought. IF we accept the risks of a vehicle without a driver, how do we accomodate the _culpability_ of that risk? Same thing in patent law. Someone needs to hold that "culpability". Maybe there'll be a robust future systems of laws that assigns the correct weightings, but it's not today.
mensetmanusman 3y ago
no, because they don't have access to a credit card to pay the fees.
- ben_w 3y ago
  Corporate bank accounts are a thing, at least one country considers bitcoin to be legal tender, and 1.7 billion humans had no back account as recently as 2018.
qayxc 3y ago
Interesting question. I guess that's one of the upcoming challenges for the entire legal system when it comes to AI. One fundamental problem with such approach would of course be money. The AI would need to have a means of paying the fees and the USPTO declaration (37 CFR 1.63) may also prove difficult for an AI - "wilfulness" w.r.t. to false statements comes to mind. But that's a whole new can of worms I don't want to open.

IanCal 3y ago

You don't have to tell them to do something specific. You can tell them to generate ideas, pick one and go from there.

ben_w 3y ago
While this is an increasingly arbitrary delineation as more things fill the previously empty gap between people and things[0], I'd count that as a human using a tool. [0] except for all the racism and sexism and slavey and arguments about animal rights and if unborn foetuses are people etc.

ben_w 3y ago

While true, that doesn't really matter. Prompts can be any experiential input, and it's trivial to turn them into agents. Even as high level controllers for robots, demonstrated by at least Agility with Digit and Boston Dynamic with Spot.

cyanydeez 3y ago
So in reality whats being patented _is the prompt that get the AI a patent_