3 ms·
The point should be to kill training on unlicensed material. There needs to be regulation and tools to identify what was the training data. But as always, first
by iamsaitam 3y ago
The point should be to kill training on unlicensed material. There needs to be regulation and tools to identify what was the training data. But as always, first comes the siphoning part, the massive extraction of value, then when the damage is done there will be the slow moving reparations and conservationism.
- cornel_io 3y agoA ton of us out here don't agree with your goals. I think these models are transformative enough that the value added by organizing and extracting patterns from the data outweighs the interests of the extremely diffuse set of copyright holders whose data was ingested. So regardless of the technical details of copyright law (which I still think are firmly in favor of OpenAI et al) I would strongly opposed any effort to tighten a legal noose here.
- JAlexoid 3y agoAgreed. And every software engineer writing code should pay 10% of their salary to the publishers of the books that they learned their programming skills from.