3 ms·

> The act of reading a book or looking at a painting isn't protected by fair use. This is a very strange way to look at it. If I encode Oppenheimer to MPEG-4,

> The act of reading a book or looking at a painting isn't protected by fair use. This is a very strange way to look at it. If I encode Oppenheimer to MPEG-4, do I now own that IP? In both cases, I'm looking at the source and encoding it to a compressed representation. A couple notes on "transformative": (1) It's just one of the four factors. (2) It means that you added new expression or meaning to it. By definition, an LLM can't create anything it wasn't trained on — it's pattern recognition, interpolation, and recombination.

fragmede 3y ago
When an LLM writes an essay about, say, Oppenheimer, the essay it spits out isn't, word for word, in the training data. it's created this new essay. Following that, asking it to write an essay about Doofenhimer, a fictional contemporary of Oppenheimer that I just invented, where was it trained on for that? to say it can't create anything when, given the depth of the training data, it seems capable of creating things, seems like an underestimation of its abilities, and moreover, what it actually means to be creative. when I'm being creative, there are connections being made between completely unrelated things that I've been exposed to at some point in my past which I combine in creative ways to create new things. if it's all just pattern recognition, interpolation, and recombination, then either nothing new can ever be created by humans doing exactly that, or LLMs are also creating new things. Are Salvador Dali's paintings not creative because the idea of clocks and the concept of melting aren't new? https://chat.openai.com/share/2b9a8245-2063-4722-81e8-20d10ce26104 https://chat.openai.com/share/2b9a8245-2063-4722-81e8-20d10c...