3 ms·
I wonder how long would it take this to get fixed, if I fed some current best-seller novels into an LLM and instructed it to reword it, renaming the characters
by torginus 3y ago
I wonder how long would it take this to get fixed, if I fed some current best-seller novels into an LLM and instructed it to reword it, renaming the characters and places, and shared the result publicly for free?
Although I fear the response would be that powerful AI orgs would put copyright filters in place and lobby for legalization for mandatory AI-DRM in open source AI as well.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ben_w 3y agoWhat you're describing sounds like a search and replace could already do it. If you mean something more transformative, did Yudkowsky get a licence for HPMOR? Did Pratchett (he might well have) get a licence from Niven to retell Ringworld as Strata? I don't know how true it is, but it's widely repeated that 50 Shades of Grey was originally a fan fiction of the Twilight series. Etc., but note that I'm not saying "no".
- somewhereoutth 3y agoI think that there is a strong argument that to be truly transformative (in a copyright moral/legal sense), the work must have been altered by human hands/mind, not purely or mainly by an automated process. So find/replace and AI is out, but reinterpreting and reformulating by human endeavour is in. I do wonder whether that will become accepted case law, assuming something like that is argued in the NYT suit.
- jncfhnb 3y ago“The cat saw the dog” “Bathed in the soft hues of twilight, the sleek feline, with its fur a tapestry of midnight shades, beheld an approaching canine companion. A symphony of amber streetlights cast gentle poles of warmth upon the cobblestone path, as the cat’s entered eyes, glinting with subtle mischief, looked into the form of the oncoming dog- a creature of boundless enthusiasm and a coat adorned with a kaleidoscope of earth tones” Since an AI has produced the latter from the former, there is no meaningful transformation.
- ben_w 3y ago> Since an AI has produced the latter from the former, there is no meaningful transformation. In law, in the eyes of those that want AI to "win", or in the eyes of those who want AI to "lose"? For all three can be different. (Now I'm remembering a Babylon 5 quote: "Understanding is a three-edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth.")
- jncfhnb 3y agoDon’t care! The problem at hand is people trying to argue that laws should be written in ways that are entirely unenforceable or have enormous gaping loopholes that undermine their stated goals.
- ben_w 3y agoLots of laws look like that to me. I don't much like that laws seem so messy either, but that just doesn't seem like much of a reason to think it won't shake out like that. The law may well start on the basis of what people feel, and work outwards from there to things that might, or might not, be actually enforceable. And the headline summary of that law may or may not have much in common with the details, which is why e.g. the USA PATRIOT Act has that name.
- jncfhnb 3y agoEhh maybe. But this feels far more egregious to me than typical.
- somewhereoutth 3y agoyes, exactly. Likewise "write a novel in the style of Terry Pratchett"
- jncfhnb 3y agoOk, now I, as a human, adjust a word. It is now my creative work.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]