3 ms·

I would argue that if I ask ChatGPT something, it doesnt "reproduce" what was written on certain website (or at least it shouldn', without attribution). It take

I would argue that if I ask ChatGPT something, it doesnt "reproduce" what was written on certain website (or at least it shouldn', without attribution). It takes what it scrapped before and re-tell it in its own words. That isn't reproducing, looks like a grey area not yet addressed in copyright laws. I would partially agree with the guy, that yes, that was a social contract since 90's, but before the AI era. Back then this use case wasn't anticipated.

Retric 2y ago
There’s nothing ambiguous from a copyright perspective, it’s a derivative work. People seem to confuse plagiarism in an academic environment from copyright. Simply using your own words doesn’t mean you’re free from copyright. However even when something infringes copyright that doesn’t mean anything necessarily happens. Just look at YouTube’s early history or the mountains of fan fiction out there.
- codetrotter 2y ago
  > Just look at YouTube’s early history But something did happen. Viacom and others sued them, and then YouTube introduced their Content ID system so that they could pay copyright holders for content that others uploaded, as well as to take down videos belonging to copyright holders that did not agree to other people uploading their content.
  - coldtea 2y ago
    >then YouTube introduced their Content ID system That's for content that's reproduced in part or fully, but verbatim (like a song, movie clip, etc, where Content ID can apply). But the parent's point is you can have trouble even for content where you "retell" something "in your own words".
    - codetrotter 2y ago
      The part I was responding to is this: > However even when something infringes copyright that doesn’t mean anything necessarily happens. Just look at YouTube’s early history or the mountains of fan fiction out there. This part is talking about uploading a copy of something verbatim, the way I read it.
  - Retric 2y ago
    > something did happen Yes, it took 2 years after creation and truly massive amounts of copyright infringement before the lawsuits by copyright owners showed up. OpenAI is getting sued, but don’t expect your requesting a website be rewritten to provoke anything unless you publish such rewritten posts at scale or something.
asimpletune 2y ago
> in its own words LLM's have no words of their own. Imagine training a LLM vs a group of people from birth on wrong information. The LLM will unquestionably just repeat in "its own words" the wrong information, whereas the group of people will of course believe some of the wrong stuff, but they will also doubt a lot of it as well. You could say that an LLM is just not good enough yet so the comparison isn't fair. In other words that people are just even more LLM'ing than the LLM, but there simply is no mechanism for an LLM to go from wrong information to right information. People on the other hand will always doubt, hypothesize, and compare and contrast whatever information they have to at least attempt to form correct answers from correct information. This in a sense is because they actually have their own words. There is, as of today, never been a smart or creative thing an LLM has ever said that doesn't literally come from other people's words. If LLM's are smart, it's because people are smart.

Retric 2y ago

There’s nothing ambiguous from a copyright perspective, it’s a derivative work. People seem to confuse plagiarism in an academic environment from copyright. Simply using your own words doesn’t mean you’re free from copyright. However even when something infringes copyright that doesn’t mean anything necessarily happens. Just look at YouTube’s early history or the mountains of fan fiction out there.

codetrotter 2y ago
> Just look at YouTube’s early history But something did happen. Viacom and others sued them, and then YouTube introduced their Content ID system so that they could pay copyright holders for content that others uploaded, as well as to take down videos belonging to copyright holders that did not agree to other people uploading their content.
- coldtea 2y ago
  >then YouTube introduced their Content ID system That's for content that's reproduced in part or fully, but verbatim (like a song, movie clip, etc, where Content ID can apply). But the parent's point is you can have trouble even for content where you "retell" something "in your own words".
  - codetrotter 2y ago
    The part I was responding to is this: > However even when something infringes copyright that doesn’t mean anything necessarily happens. Just look at YouTube’s early history or the mountains of fan fiction out there. This part is talking about uploading a copy of something verbatim, the way I read it.
- Retric 2y ago
  > something did happen Yes, it took 2 years after creation and truly massive amounts of copyright infringement before the lawsuits by copyright owners showed up. OpenAI is getting sued, but don’t expect your requesting a website be rewritten to provoke anything unless you publish such rewritten posts at scale or something.

asimpletune 2y ago

> in its own words LLM's have no words of their own. Imagine training a LLM vs a group of people from birth on wrong information. The LLM will unquestionably just repeat in "its own words" the wrong information, whereas the group of people will of course believe some of the wrong stuff, but they will also doubt a lot of it as well. You could say that an LLM is just not good enough yet so the comparison isn't fair. In other words that people are just even more LLM'ing than the LLM, but there simply is no mechanism for an LLM to go from wrong information to right information. People on the other hand will always doubt, hypothesize, and compare and contrast whatever information they have to at least attempt to form correct answers from correct information. This in a sense is because they actually have their own words. There is, as of today, never been a smart or creative thing an LLM has ever said that doesn't literally come from other people's words. If LLM's are smart, it's because people are smart.