3 ms·

Whilst I'm generally not against piracy - I think there are valid reasons as to why it's a thing - I can't help but feel like disguising pirating content under

Whilst I'm generally not against piracy - I think there are valid reasons as to why it's a thing - I can't help but feel like disguising pirating content under the veil of fair use is a bit far fetched and disingenuous. Using copyrighted material in a fair use way seems fine to me and is important. But these companies not wanting to pay for creating their model and then just claiming fair use is silly.

Ukv 2y ago
> these companies not wanting to pay for creating their model and then just claiming fair use Certainly model developers would prefer not to pay if given the option, but I also feel it's not untruthful to say that it hasn't actually been feasible to license content on the scale required. Even just for training an object detection network as a side project, I struggled to find sufficient pre-training material outside of web-scraped datasets like ImageNet. I even contacted Getty and was told directly that they don't license images for machine learning. Something like a compulsory licensing scheme where you pay into a pot to train a model could potentially work. Mostly, I hope whatever we eventually get is feasible for open source groups, individual developers, universities, smaller companies, etc. rather than only being made with the few biggest companies in mind.
- dontlaugh 2y ago
  Or, you simply don’t train anything. Not all technology needs to exist.
  - Ukv 2y ago
    Large-scale pre-training is not specific to chatbots. There are undeniably a huge range of beneficial uses for machine learning: language translation, video transcription, material/product defect detection, weather forecasting/early warning systems, OCR, spam filtering, protein folding, tumor segmentation, drug discovery and interaction prediction, etc. "simply don’t train anything" does not seem ethically (many models have the potential to or already are improving lives), politically (staying in the lead is currently seen as an important issue), or legally (as noted in this brief, "the ultimate test of fair use is whether the copyright law’s goal of ‘promoting the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ ‘would be better served by allowing the use than by preventing it.’") viable to me.

Ukv 2y ago

> these companies not wanting to pay for creating their model and then just claiming fair use Certainly model developers would prefer not to pay if given the option, but I also feel it's not untruthful to say that it hasn't actually been feasible to license content on the scale required. Even just for training an object detection network as a side project, I struggled to find sufficient pre-training material outside of web-scraped datasets like ImageNet. I even contacted Getty and was told directly that they don't license images for machine learning. Something like a compulsory licensing scheme where you pay into a pot to train a model could potentially work. Mostly, I hope whatever we eventually get is feasible for open source groups, individual developers, universities, smaller companies, etc. rather than only being made with the few biggest companies in mind.

dontlaugh 2y ago
Or, you simply don’t train anything. Not all technology needs to exist.
- Ukv 2y ago
  Large-scale pre-training is not specific to chatbots. There are undeniably a huge range of beneficial uses for machine learning: language translation, video transcription, material/product defect detection, weather forecasting/early warning systems, OCR, spam filtering, protein folding, tumor segmentation, drug discovery and interaction prediction, etc. "simply don’t train anything" does not seem ethically (many models have the potential to or already are improving lives), politically (staying in the lead is currently seen as an important issue), or legally (as noted in this brief, "the ultimate test of fair use is whether the copyright law’s goal of ‘promoting the Progress of Science and useful Arts’ ‘would be better served by allowing the use than by preventing it.’") viable to me.