3 ms·
It seems obvious to me that a system in which intellectual property can be ingested into an artificial intelligence system and then provide no value to the orig
by cowpig 3y ago
It seems obvious to me that a system in which intellectual property can be ingested into an artificial intelligence system and then provide no value to the original creator is unsustainable.
The value of content that is generated through real-world effort like research and investigation will plummet towards zero. And then what? You can't just have a society built off of LLMs feeding each other.
It also feels obvious that it's going to be very hard to enforce any kind of rules around this.
And further obvious that our current legal framework was not built with this kind of situation in mind, and that any decisions around rules right now are going to have an outsized impact on the path we take into the future.
So what now? Are we going to let some panel of judges rule on whether training violates copyright, and call it a day?
We're going to need some good, nuanced, well-intentioned debate and come up with a coherent set of rules that to create a fair and sustainable system.
- WesolyKubeczek 3y agoThe moment the rules are finalized, flocks of bright unprincipled people will rush to gamify them to turn a profit.
- cowpig 3y agoIs the implication that we should therefore not try to come up with good rules?
- WesolyKubeczek 3y agoNo, we should calibrate expectations accordingly and not assume that even the signatories to the rules won’t rush to exploit the loopholes the nanosecond they put their signatures there. There should be a way to codify what “the spirit” of the rules is and that seeking a way to subvert it is against the rules too.