4 ms·

> unless you can point to regurgitation of memorized code I have, on many occasions, gotten an LLM to do just this. It's not particularly hard. In the most

> unless you can point to regurgitation of memorized code I have, on many occasions, gotten an LLM to do just this. It's not particularly hard. In the most recent case google's search bar LLM happily regurgitated a digital ocean article as if it was it's own output. Searching for some strings in the comments located the original page and it was a 95% match between origin and output. > The memorization older models showed came from problems in the training data, And what proof do you have that they "fixed" this? And what was the fix? > harry potter and people writing about harry potter I'm not sure that's how you get GPT to reproduce upwards of 85% of Harry Potter novels. > Second, infringement would need discovery to uncover and would be contingent on user input. That's not at all how copyright infringement works. That would be if you wanted to prove malice and get triple damages. Copyright infringement is an exceptionally simple violation of the law. You either copied, or you did not. > For copyright it very much matters if something is lifted verbatim vs modified. Transformation is a valid defense for _some_ uses. It is not for commercial uses. Using LLM generated code for commercial purposes is a hazard.

adampunk 7mo ago
This must be why all of these copyright plaintiffs are having tremendous days in court! If even half of this were correct, they wouldn’t be losing in summary judgment. We have yet to see a single judgment come down against a model maker for distributing the gist of content. We have yet to see a single judgment come down against a model maker for infringement at all. Copyright is just an inapt tool here. It’s not going to do the job. It is not as though big interests have not tried to use this tool. It just doesn’t reflect what’s actually happening and it’s going to lose again and again. We can imagine a theoretical legal regime where what is done with large language models counts as copyright infringement, we just don’t live in a world where that regime holds.

adampunk 7mo ago

This must be why all of these copyright plaintiffs are having tremendous days in court! If even half of this were correct, they wouldn’t be losing in summary judgment. We have yet to see a single judgment come down against a model maker for distributing the gist of content. We have yet to see a single judgment come down against a model maker for infringement at all. Copyright is just an inapt tool here. It’s not going to do the job. It is not as though big interests have not tried to use this tool. It just doesn’t reflect what’s actually happening and it’s going to lose again and again. We can imagine a theoretical legal regime where what is done with large language models counts as copyright infringement, we just don’t live in a world where that regime holds.