7 ms·
I also find it funny, I said this regarding the other thread and article[0] '"They then copied those stolen fruits" How are these fruits "stolen" if they stil
by nadermx 5mo ago
I also find it funny, I said this regarding the other thread and article[0]
'"They then copied those stolen fruits"
How are these fruits "stolen" if they still have what was allegedley stolen?
Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985): The Supreme Court ruled that the unauthorized sale of phonorecords of copyrighted musical compositions does not constitute "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" goods under the National Stolen Property Act
And even if, arguendo, sure its stolen. The purpose of copyright is to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries"
And you would be hard pressed to prove that LLM's haven't advanced the arts and sciences, so at bare minimum transformative, ie fair use.'
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48026207#48029072 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48026207#48029072
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoCool cool cool. So all the code and data you send to anthropic and chatgpt should be mass distributable to forward other peoples arts and science? All your meeting notes with ai summarizers, slack chats with bots? Might as well put your entire company and all plans for it on github mit licensed. Ill take a peek, see if there's anything valuable to me in that. Don't worry you can keep it all on your github too. It's still yours afterall. Copilot will be training on it too though btw
- IAmLiterallyAB 5mo agoThat's a privacy violation, not relevant.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoNo it's not. You exposed that data to an LLM. Should have read the fine print. The laws around that don't make sense to me anymore so therefore I own that stuff now. That's how this works right? You do know chatgpt etc can read everything you write, right? Also social media profile pics. Great way to get faces for deep fake ads. Most people are just 1 phone call away from being voice cloned. Our likeness isn't all that important either if you think about it. Maybe meta will clone your writing style and sign into your meta account and message your friends telling them about this awesome new product. Meta owns the account and you uploaded data to it.
- Our_Benefactors 5mo agoLiterally none of these things are defensible positions, so nobody will take you seriously.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoMany of the things I wrote are already happening. The others probably are but haven't been reported yet.
- collabs 5mo agoI think Anthorpic has pledged to not use team and enterprise user's data for training purposes. I don't mind if they do some verification or whatever as long as it doesn't end up in the responses it gives others.
- KPGv2 5mo agoyes yes and google pledged "don't be evil" Don't be naïve. A corporation would tear the flesh from your body if it meant a better quarterly earnings report.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoHaving seen someone die at work, this is factual. The comments made during and after were eye opening.
- HWR_14 5mo agoWhat Silicon Valley company over a decade old has respected the limitations on using data that they agreed to? At least any valuable data.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoI have an amazing timeshare for sale and you seem like someone who would really see the opportunity this provides. How are your financials?
- Johnny555 5mo ago>How are these fruits "stolen" if they still have what was allegedley stolen? If you write a book and I take it and embed its knowledge into my product that is so pervasive that no one needs to buy your book any more (and I don't even credit you so no one knows where that knowledge came from), to you really still have what was stolen? And I didn't even buy a copy of your book to copy it.
- throwawayIche9j 5mo agoYes. That's not to say that something damaging wasn't done, but nothing was stolen. Stealing/theft requires deprivation of property. It's like receiving a normal nonlethal punch in the face and calling it murder. Murder requires someone dying. > Theft [...] is the act of taking another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it. --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealing
- skeeter2020 5mo ago>> Stealing/theft requires deprivation of property maybe you should look up the definition of property, which is a set of legally recognized rights over a thing, typically including: * possession (what you're focusing on) * use * exclusion * transfer The last 3 seem like they have been breached, in legally that's theft.
- throwawayIche9j 5mo agoTheft is not the breach of any property right. It's specifically the deprivation of property without consent. Yes, I have checked the definition in my jurisdiction. Getting punched in the face also violates rights, yet isn't murder. Murder is specifically about dying.
- odo1242 5mo agoYou’re splitting hairs over a definition that isn’t relevant here (theft and copyright infringement are different things) to defend something that even you agree is bad.
- albedoa 5mo agoYou were swiftly corrected about your misunderstanding under your original comment. Reposting it here, removing the quote farther from its context, and hoping to not be downvoted again is very weird!
- nadermx 5mo agoI don't see how me quoting the actual complaint the news was about, in both threads, was me being swiftly corrected. If you where to base it on upvotes then this one shows I'm right and you got swiftly corrected here. In both cases it was relevant as both threads where not yet merged and about the same complaint. And held two positons on front page and I was adding to the discourse.