4 ms·

Sorry, but GP is begging the question. Whether or not training AI on copyrighted material constitutes theft is not a settled question you can simply assume and

Sorry, but GP is begging the question. Whether or not training AI on copyrighted material constitutes theft is not a settled question you can simply assume and move on from.

consumer451 3y ago
This is indeed not a settled question, but my point is that the answer doesn't really matter, either way. This appears to be how the world works: focus on the product, don't get all caught up in "silly" legal technicalities, and this is how fortunes are made. Regarding the argument, I have seen both sides argued well. The best argument that I have seen for OpenAI being at fault is in cases where gen AI outputs exact copies of copyrighted work, be they visual or text. Dall-E and GPT both need to have serious guardrails added to prevent this, as is shown by the leaked system prompts. If you can jailbrean an LLM, it happily provides the user with exact copies of copyrighted work, in some cases.
benreesman 3y ago
The legal semantics are probably on their way to the Supreme Court. The ethical debate had settled into a soft consensus that this sort of thing was icky at best on topics ranging from FB leveraging the Harvard facebooks to Uber ignoring medallion laws to Google scanning all those books to AMP cutting the publisher out of the loop to Amazon eating the OSHA fines rather than give the workers bathroom breaks to FB/Google paying the fines and laughing over EU regulations (which in fairness they seemed to have backed down on), to currently Apple trying to malicious compliance the DMA gatekeeper regulations. Some of this stuff has been litigated, some not, all of it is cringe-worthy, this is a new low. The parent cited germane examples from the list. That adds to the discussion. Folks are free to do the moderate effort thing and write a dissenting reply, they’re not supposed to do the lazy thing and grey out something they spinal-reflex don’t like. You took the time to write a reply, so even though I think you’re wrong, I applaud you taking the time to state a position.

Sorry, but GP is begging the question. Whether or not training AI on copyrighted material constitutes theft is not a settled question you can simply assume and move on from.

consumer451 3y ago

This is indeed not a settled question, but my point is that the answer doesn't really matter, either way. This appears to be how the world works: focus on the product, don't get all caught up in "silly" legal technicalities, and this is how fortunes are made. Regarding the argument, I have seen both sides argued well. The best argument that I have seen for OpenAI being at fault is in cases where gen AI outputs exact copies of copyrighted work, be they visual or text. Dall-E and GPT both need to have serious guardrails added to prevent this, as is shown by the leaked system prompts. If you can jailbrean an LLM, it happily provides the user with exact copies of copyrighted work, in some cases.

benreesman 3y ago

The legal semantics are probably on their way to the Supreme Court. The ethical debate had settled into a soft consensus that this sort of thing was icky at best on topics ranging from FB leveraging the Harvard facebooks to Uber ignoring medallion laws to Google scanning all those books to AMP cutting the publisher out of the loop to Amazon eating the OSHA fines rather than give the workers bathroom breaks to FB/Google paying the fines and laughing over EU regulations (which in fairness they seemed to have backed down on), to currently Apple trying to malicious compliance the DMA gatekeeper regulations. Some of this stuff has been litigated, some not, all of it is cringe-worthy, this is a new low. The parent cited germane examples from the list. That adds to the discussion. Folks are free to do the moderate effort thing and write a dissenting reply, they’re not supposed to do the lazy thing and grey out something they spinal-reflex don’t like. You took the time to write a reply, so even though I think you’re wrong, I applaud you taking the time to state a position.