491
submitted 8 months ago by ylai@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Fisk400@feddit.nu 128 points 8 months ago

They know what they fed the thing. Not backing up their own training data would be insane. They are not insane, just thieves

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 18 points 8 months ago

Everyone says this but the truth is copyright law has been unfit for purpose for well over 30 years now. And the lords were written no one expected something like the internet to ever come along and they certainly didn't expect something like AI. We can't just keep applying the same old copyright laws to new situations when they already don't work.

I'm sure they did illegally obtain the work but is that necessarily a bad thing? For example they're not actually making that content available to anyone so if I pirate a movie and then only I watch it, I don't think anyone would really think I should be arrested for that, so why is it unacceptable for them but fine for me?

[-] oKtosiTe@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago

if I pirate a movie and then only I watch it, I don't think anyone would really think I should be arrested for that

There are definitely people out there that think you should be arrested for that.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 8 months ago

Even the police are unsure if it's actually a crime though. Crimes require someone to lose something and no one can point to a lost product so it's difficult to really quantify.

And it's not even technically breach of copyright since you're not selling it.

[-] exanime@lemmy.today 2 points 8 months ago

But they ARE selling it ... Every answer Chat GPT makes came from possibly stolen material

[-] HaywardT@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 8 months ago

Isn't that true of every opinion you have. All the knowledge you have is based on works of others that came before you.

[-] exanime@lemmy.today 3 points 8 months ago

Not untill I bill you for it

Also, no there is such a thing as an original thought or opinion... Even if it's informed on other knowledge

There is a difference between reinterpreting other knowledge and just Frankensteining multiple work together

[-] HaywardT@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 months ago

I don't know enough about LLMs but Neural networks are capable of original thought. I suspect LLMs are too because of their relationship to Neural Networks.

[-] confusedbytheBasics@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

You're using the word 'stolen' which doesn't fit. It would be accurate to say 'every answer comes from possibly unlicensed material '.

[-] Guntrigger@feddit.ch 1 points 8 months ago

Allegedly possibly maybe accidentally whoopsie not quite licensed fully material.

[-] exanime@lemmy.today 0 points 8 months ago

Yeap, the real term (I think) would be copyright infringement

load more comments (26 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)
this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
491 points (95.4% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
1164 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS