5 ms·

I have yet to see a demonstration that it “learns like a human”. Even if it did, that’d be very shaky legal grounds for anything. Almost everything man-made “ma

by otikik 3y ago

I have yet to see a demonstration that it “learns like a human”. Even if it did, that’d be very shaky legal grounds for anything. Almost everything man-made “makes something like a human”, because we made the thing, and it is convenient for us to have things that are similar to us in some ways. That doesn’t mean that we have to start giving gloves special legal treatment, since they have 5 fingers, like humans do.

logicchains 3y ago
Humans learn about the world by consuming copyrighted text, LLMs learn about the world by consuming copyrighted text. How does that not qualify as LLMs learning like humans?
- edgyquant 3y ago
  Humans are born with certain intuitions and the ability to interact with the world around them even if they never interact with other humans. I have a hard time taking this argument in good faith
  - logicchains 3y ago
    If they never interact with other humans the generally don't develop the ability to reason symbolically and score very low on IQ tests, not much different from great apes.
- otikik 3y ago
  The main verb you are using here, "consume", means very different things when applied to humans and when applied to computers. It's similar to how "an airplane flies like a bird". It does indeed fly, but it does not flap its wings.
- mpweiher 3y ago
  No. Humans have learned about the world for (adapt number to current scientific knowledge) hundreds of thousands of years without consuming copyrighted texts. And consuming copyrighted material is fine. Copying copyrighted material requires permission. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copying "Copying is the duplication of information or an artifact based on an instance of that information or artifact, and not using the process that originally generated it. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright "A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives the creator of an original work, or another owner of the right, the exclusive, legally secured right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time" Notice it doesn't say "consume". If you store a copyrighted work in a computer system, you copied the work. The exact nature of the computer system does not matter, nor does the way you copied it. It may be a weird, sometimes lossy, sometimes not lossy database capable of adapting the material copied into it, but it is still a database. And just because you call the process of copying data into this weird database "learning" or "training" does not mean it is in any way legally or morally equivalent to a human learning. Even if it were somehow technically equivalent, which it is not. And just because your database is capable of adapting the copyrighted works you copied into it does not mean you are exempt from copyright. Because "to adapt" is one of the rights limited by copyright. But of course the fact that your database is capable of reproducing so much of the copyrighted texts your copied into it verbatim is a strong indicator that it is, in fact, a database, or at least can be treated equivalently to one. And no, Copyright law is not rooted in Kantian philosophy in any meaningful way. Copyright law is a pragmatic human law, made by human for human/societal purposes, such as encouraging the creation of intellectual works. If exceptions are made, it will be for pragmatic reasons, not for there being some sort of equivalence. And if any exception are made, I doubt they will be "do whatever you want", but will entail mandatory compensation for the copyright holders. In Germany, for example, various types of empty media (audio-cassettes, usb-sticks etc.) include a fee to copyright holders. Though of course that approach failed in the Google Books project, despite the clear societal benefits.

by otikik 3y ago

logicchains 3y ago

Humans learn about the world by consuming copyrighted text, LLMs learn about the world by consuming copyrighted text. How does that not qualify as LLMs learning like humans?

edgyquant 3y ago
Humans are born with certain intuitions and the ability to interact with the world around them even if they never interact with other humans. I have a hard time taking this argument in good faith
- logicchains 3y ago
  If they never interact with other humans the generally don't develop the ability to reason symbolically and score very low on IQ tests, not much different from great apes.
otikik 3y ago
The main verb you are using here, "consume", means very different things when applied to humans and when applied to computers. It's similar to how "an airplane flies like a bird". It does indeed fly, but it does not flap its wings.
mpweiher 3y ago
No. Humans have learned about the world for (adapt number to current scientific knowledge) hundreds of thousands of years without consuming copyrighted texts. And consuming copyrighted material is fine. Copying copyrighted material requires permission. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copying "Copying is the duplication of information or an artifact based on an instance of that information or artifact, and not using the process that originally generated it. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright "A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives the creator of an original work, or another owner of the right, the exclusive, legally secured right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time" Notice it doesn't say "consume". If you store a copyrighted work in a computer system, you copied the work. The exact nature of the computer system does not matter, nor does the way you copied it. It may be a weird, sometimes lossy, sometimes not lossy database capable of adapting the material copied into it, but it is still a database. And just because you call the process of copying data into this weird database "learning" or "training" does not mean it is in any way legally or morally equivalent to a human learning. Even if it were somehow technically equivalent, which it is not. And just because your database is capable of adapting the copyrighted works you copied into it does not mean you are exempt from copyright. Because "to adapt" is one of the rights limited by copyright. But of course the fact that your database is capable of reproducing so much of the copyrighted texts your copied into it verbatim is a strong indicator that it is, in fact, a database, or at least can be treated equivalently to one. And no, Copyright law is not rooted in Kantian philosophy in any meaningful way. Copyright law is a pragmatic human law, made by human for human/societal purposes, such as encouraging the creation of intellectual works. If exceptions are made, it will be for pragmatic reasons, not for there being some sort of equivalence. And if any exception are made, I doubt they will be "do whatever you want", but will entail mandatory compensation for the copyright holders. In Germany, for example, various types of empty media (audio-cassettes, usb-sticks etc.) include a fee to copyright holders. Though of course that approach failed in the Google Books project, despite the clear societal benefits.