3 ms·
Would it be reasonable for NYT to demand that all humans forget anything learned from NYT articles? The NYT is asserting a drastic expansion of copyright, to c
by brookst 3y ago
Would it be reasonable for NYT to demand that all humans forget anything learned from NYT articles?
The NYT is asserting a drastic expansion of copyright, to cover not just the specific expression of ideas but the ideas themselves.
We should be wary of AI companies, and copyright is woefully unprepared for our new world, but the answer is not to change the system so creators retain infinite control over who can even remember their work.
- endisneigh 3y agoComputers are not humans. Why do people continue to make these inane comparisons? Show me a human can remember even half of what GPT4 was trained on and I’ll concede the point.
- brookst 3y agoHow many terabytes of data have you been exposed to in your life? Songs, movies, books, day to day vision and memories, etc. Those all influenced you. You may not have perfect memory, but neither does GPT4. You may rememeber a tiny subset of that data perfectly, just like GPT4. The inanity here is in seeking to extend copyright beyond reproduction and into learning and cultural accretion. It’s crazy to me that anyone would look at the past 100 years of copyright and think that what we need publishers with legal control over reading.