3 ms·
The rules remains the same. If you reuse a significant amount of code as is, you are infringe copyright. If you internalized some new knowledge based on some co
by jpambrun 3y ago
The rules remains the same. If you reuse a significant amount of code as is, you are infringe copyright. If you internalized some new knowledge based on some code and come up with a new implementation.. this is how we human learn. This is expected. Why would it be different for llm?
- themaninthedark 3y agoAnd that is what this breaks down to, is a LLM learning? or is it just regurgitating? From my limited knowledge, it looks like it is just regurgitating. This is based on what I have heard about outputs, i.e. stays the same if rand function is fixed. Also with code there are finite ways to create something functional as opposed to an opinion paper where there are a range of viewpoints and how to express those viewpoints.
- jpambrun 3y ago"And that is what this breaks down to, is a LLM learning? or is it just regurgitating?" You can make this argument for any artist. We study whole art movements which are periods of time where all art looks the same. Somehow, we want code production to be completely novel with no prior inspiration? To your second point. I agree. There is limited expressivity in code implementation. As a human how would you cope with that? You can't recall any prior code you may have seen and you must write completely different code than anything in existence or face copyright litigation?