5 ms·
Which maps perfectly onto how people would talk about similar work if it wasn't AI. If I go to the library and read a bunch of books and journal articles to un
by bodiekane 3y ago
Which maps perfectly onto how people would talk about similar work if it wasn't AI.
If I go to the library and read a bunch of books and journal articles to understand something, that's certainly research or education and not "stealing".
If I then use my understanding gained from that education or training to create a new invention, it's plausible that someone could "steal" information from my invention that I never intended to publish, and which was reasonably expected to be private trade secret information not available to others.
- LtWorf 3y agoThe moment that you can train an AI to be a good developer just with a java manual and some slides on design patterns, your analogy will make sense. But for now an AI requires billion of times more data than a human brain to extrapolate anything useful. Which means that your comparison is meaningless.
- GlickWick 3y agoI think it's a meaningful comparison still. As a human I can comb through tons of prior art to learn my trade, and that's how we learn most of what we know. Yes, an AI requires more, but it's still the same basic idea. I'm still not comfortable with using AI to replace artistic functions in particular for a variety of reasons, but the person you're replying to is definitely within the realm of reason.
- LtWorf 3y ago> it's still the same basic idea You create weights to decide which word comes next most probably inside your brain and need to do million of multiplications to say a word? I think it might not be the same basic idea at all.
- GlickWick 3y agoI think you might want to take a step back and understand the abstraction they were making.