3 ms·

ChatGPT plagiarizes the anwers of those whom you call "arseholes". How is using Stackoverflow in read-only mode different from using ChatGPT? Except of course

ChatGPT plagiarizes the anwers of those whom you call "arseholes". How is using Stackoverflow in read-only mode different from using ChatGPT? Except of course that reading Stackoverflow directly has better retention rates, better explanations and more in-depth discussions. (My view is that moderators can be annoying but the issue is overblown.)

verdverm 2y ago
Plagiarizing means violating copyright, loosely speaking. When you, as a human, use SO, you assign your rights to the content to SO. That company is licensing the content to 3rd parties, including those who want to train their LLMs. What I find is that the LLMs are not spitting out SO text word for word, as one would when plagiarizing. Rather, the LLM uses the context and words of my question when answering, making the response specific and cohesive (by piecing together answers from across questions).
- zahlman 2y ago
  >When you, as a human, use SO, you assign your rights to the content to SO. No, you don't. You license it. The community gets a Creative Commons license (https://stackoverflow.com/help/licensing https://stackoverflow.com/help/licensing), and the company gets a few additional rights (https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service/public#licensing https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service/public#lice...). You retain copyright.
- tomrod 2y ago
  I thought plagarizing was producing new work substantially copied from prior work, regardless who owns the copyright? I thought this because self-plagarizing exists.
  - verdverm 2y ago
    Well, if we could not reproduce with changes, what others have written and we have learned, it is unlikely we could make real progress. There are many more concepts, like fair use, meaningful changes, and other legalese; as well as how people use the term "plagiarize" differently. I never heard of this "self-plagarizing" concept, it seems like something fringe that would not be enforceable other than in the court of public opinion or the classroom via grades
    - tomrod 2y ago
      You're one of today's lucky 10,000! https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/ It's a core issue in academia and other areas where the output is heavily the written word. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism#Self-plagiarism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism#Self-plagiarism [1] https://ori.hhs.gov/self-plagiarism https://ori.hhs.gov/self-plagiarism [2] https://www.aje.com/arc/self-plagiarism-how-to-define-it-and-why-to-avoid-it/ https://www.aje.com/arc/self-plagiarism-how-to-define-it-and...
      - verdverm 2y ago
        Reproducing sections is useful in academic publishing. I saw it while reading 100s of papers during my PhD. (1) If you are reading your entrypoint into an area of research, or a group, it is useful context on first encounter (2) If you are not, then you can easily skip it (3) Citing, instead of reproducing sections like background work, means you have to go look up other papers, meaning a paper can no longer stand on its own. Self-plagiarism is an opinion among a subset of academics, not something widely discussed or debated. Are there bad apples, sure. Is there a systemic issue, I don't think so.

verdverm 2y ago

Plagiarizing means violating copyright, loosely speaking. When you, as a human, use SO, you assign your rights to the content to SO. That company is licensing the content to 3rd parties, including those who want to train their LLMs. What I find is that the LLMs are not spitting out SO text word for word, as one would when plagiarizing. Rather, the LLM uses the context and words of my question when answering, making the response specific and cohesive (by piecing together answers from across questions).

zahlman 2y ago
>When you, as a human, use SO, you assign your rights to the content to SO. No, you don't. You license it. The community gets a Creative Commons license (https://stackoverflow.com/help/licensing https://stackoverflow.com/help/licensing), and the company gets a few additional rights (https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service/public#licensing https://stackoverflow.com/legal/terms-of-service/public#lice...). You retain copyright.
tomrod 2y ago
I thought plagarizing was producing new work substantially copied from prior work, regardless who owns the copyright? I thought this because self-plagarizing exists.
- verdverm 2y ago
  Well, if we could not reproduce with changes, what others have written and we have learned, it is unlikely we could make real progress. There are many more concepts, like fair use, meaningful changes, and other legalese; as well as how people use the term "plagiarize" differently. I never heard of this "self-plagarizing" concept, it seems like something fringe that would not be enforceable other than in the court of public opinion or the classroom via grades
  - tomrod 2y ago
    You're one of today's lucky 10,000! https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/ It's a core issue in academia and other areas where the output is heavily the written word. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism#Self-plagiarism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism#Self-plagiarism [1] https://ori.hhs.gov/self-plagiarism https://ori.hhs.gov/self-plagiarism [2] https://www.aje.com/arc/self-plagiarism-how-to-define-it-and-why-to-avoid-it/ https://www.aje.com/arc/self-plagiarism-how-to-define-it-and...
    - verdverm 2y ago
      Reproducing sections is useful in academic publishing. I saw it while reading 100s of papers during my PhD. (1) If you are reading your entrypoint into an area of research, or a group, it is useful context on first encounter (2) If you are not, then you can easily skip it (3) Citing, instead of reproducing sections like background work, means you have to go look up other papers, meaning a paper can no longer stand on its own. Self-plagiarism is an opinion among a subset of academics, not something widely discussed or debated. Are there bad apples, sure. Is there a systemic issue, I don't think so.