this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
444 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

72319 readers
2468 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
444
Report: Potential NYT lawsuit could force OpenAI to wipe ChatGPT and start over (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 years ago by wanderingmagus@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world
139 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://nom.mom/post/121481

OpenAI could be fined up to $150,000 for each piece of infringing content.https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/08/report-potential-nyt-lawsuit-could-force-openai-to-wipe-chatgpt-and-start-over/#comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Swervish@lemmy.ml 57 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Not trying to argue or troll, but I really don't get this take, maybe I'm just naive though.

Like yea, fuck Big Data, but...

Humans do this naturally, we consume data, we copy data, sometimes for profit. When a program does it, people freak out?

edit well fuck me for taking 10 minutes to write my comment, seems this was already said and covered as I was typing mine lol

[–] QHC@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's just a natural extension of the concept that entities have some kind of ownership of their creation and thus some say over how it's used. We already do this for humans and human-based organizations, so why would a program not need to follow the same rules?

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 25 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because we don't already do this. In fact, the raw knowledge contained in a copyrighted work is explicitly not copyrighted and can be done with as people please. Only the specific expression of that knowledge can be copyrighted.

An AI model doesn't contain the copyrighted works that went into training it. It only contains the concepts that were learned from it.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There’s no learning of concepts. That’s why models hallucinate so frequently. They don’t “know” anything, they’re doing a lot of math based on what they’ve seen before and essentially taking the best guess at what the next word is.

[–] MickeySwitcherooney@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago

There very much is learning of concepts. This is completely provable. You can give it problems it has never seen before and it will come up with good solutions.