3 ms·

I can't stand corporations with excuseses like this. "But we have too much scale to fix that." "But we need this data to operate." "We can't be responsible at o

by bmitc 2y ago

I can't stand corporations with excuseses like this. "But we have too much scale to fix that." "But we need this data to operate." "We can't be responsible at our scale." I say too bad for all of it. If you're not a viable business without bending rules and laws, then you're not a viable business.

gruez 2y ago
>I can't stand corporations with excuseses like this. "But we have too much scale to fix that." "But we need this data to operate." "We can't be responsible at our scale." I say too bad for all of it. If you read the source article that's a huge mischaracterization of their position. >“Limiting training data to public domain books and drawings created more than a century ago might yield an interesting experiment, but would not provide AI systems that meet the needs of today’s citizens.” >OpenAI said it complies with all copyright laws when training its models and that “we believe that legally copyright law does not forbid training”. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/07/openai-warns-copyright-crackdown-could-doom-chatgpt/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/07/openai-warns... In other words they're claiming that whatever they're doing abide by all current copyright laws, and don't want future laws to curtail them. They're not asking for retroactive carve-outs for their current illegal behavior.
- bmitc 2y ago
  I was speaking somewhat generally because this is a card often played by corporations. However, I think your quotes dance around the issue. > > OpenAI said it complies with all copyright laws when training its models and that “we believe that legally copyright law does not forbid training”. The key thing there is that OpenAI says this. Do the courts say this? Do the people agree? OpenAI is led by a pathological liar. We can't take anything that starts with "OpenAI says ..." without a huge grain of salt.
  - gruez 2y ago
    >The key thing there is that OpenAI says this. Do the courts say this? Do the people agree? That's going to be tied up in the courts forever, so it's a dead end from a discussion perspective. >OpenAI is led by a pathological liar. We can't take anything that starts with "OpenAI says ..." without a huge grain of salt. I'm not claiming what they're saying is true, only that it's not as hypocritical as you make it out to be.
- dwattttt 2y ago
  >OpenAI said it complies with all copyright laws when training its models and that “we believe that legally copyright law does not forbid training”. I mean, it sounds like they aren't even offering excuses? They're just saying "we're using copyrighted material for training" and "we think that doesn't break any laws". Laws don't generally care whether you know them in detail.

by bmitc 2y ago

gruez 2y ago

>I can't stand corporations with excuseses like this. "But we have too much scale to fix that." "But we need this data to operate." "We can't be responsible at our scale." I say too bad for all of it. If you read the source article that's a huge mischaracterization of their position. >“Limiting training data to public domain books and drawings created more than a century ago might yield an interesting experiment, but would not provide AI systems that meet the needs of today’s citizens.” >OpenAI said it complies with all copyright laws when training its models and that “we believe that legally copyright law does not forbid training”. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/07/openai-warns-copyright-crackdown-could-doom-chatgpt/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/07/openai-warns... In other words they're claiming that whatever they're doing abide by all current copyright laws, and don't want future laws to curtail them. They're not asking for retroactive carve-outs for their current illegal behavior.

bmitc 2y ago
I was speaking somewhat generally because this is a card often played by corporations. However, I think your quotes dance around the issue. > > OpenAI said it complies with all copyright laws when training its models and that “we believe that legally copyright law does not forbid training”. The key thing there is that OpenAI says this. Do the courts say this? Do the people agree? OpenAI is led by a pathological liar. We can't take anything that starts with "OpenAI says ..." without a huge grain of salt.
- gruez 2y ago
  >The key thing there is that OpenAI says this. Do the courts say this? Do the people agree? That's going to be tied up in the courts forever, so it's a dead end from a discussion perspective. >OpenAI is led by a pathological liar. We can't take anything that starts with "OpenAI says ..." without a huge grain of salt. I'm not claiming what they're saying is true, only that it's not as hypocritical as you make it out to be.
dwattttt 2y ago
>OpenAI said it complies with all copyright laws when training its models and that “we believe that legally copyright law does not forbid training”. I mean, it sounds like they aren't even offering excuses? They're just saying "we're using copyrighted material for training" and "we think that doesn't break any laws". Laws don't generally care whether you know them in detail.