3 ms·
'Someone else's work' -- exactly. Not 'the output of some tool'. I'm not saying what the guy did wasn't wrong or dumb, I'm saying: Plagiarism has a strict defi
by mckirk 2y ago
'Someone else's work' -- exactly. Not 'the output of some tool'.
I'm not saying what the guy did wasn't wrong or dumb, I'm saying: Plagiarism has a strict definition, and I don't think it can be applied to the case of directly copying the output of an LLM -- because plagiarism refers to copying the work of another author, and I don't think LLMs are generally regarded (so far) as being able to have this kind of 'authorhood'.
- bdangubic 2y agoplagiarism does NOT refer to copying the work of another author, it refers to you submitting work as yours that you didn’t yourself write. if I copy entire article from the Economist, did I plagiarize!? There is no author attribution so we don’t know the author… Many articles in media today are LLM generated (fully or partially), can I copy those if someone sticks there name as author?! bottom line is - you didn’t do the work but copied it from elsewhere, you plagiarized it, period
- mckirk 2y agoI'll just link here to another comment I made that sums up my argument quite well, I think: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42246168 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42246168