Technology

59605 readers

3440 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

888

Asking ChatGPT to Repeat Words ‘Forever’ Is Now a Terms of Service Violation (www.404media.co)

submitted 11 months ago by misk@sopuli.xyz to c/technology@lemmy.world

232 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

First of all no: Training a model and selling the model is demonstrably equivalent to re-distributing the raw data.

Secondly: What about all the copyleft work in there? That work is specifically licensed such that nobody can use the work to create a non-free derivative, which is exactly what openAI has done.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Copyleft is the only valid argument here. Everything else falls under fair use as it is a derivative work.

[–] CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If I scrape a bunch of data, put it in a database, and then make that database queryable only using obscure, arcane prompts: Is that a derivative work permitted under fair use?

Because if you can get chatgpt to spit out raw training data with the right prompt, it can essentially be used as a database of copyrighted stuff that is very difficult to query.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

No because that would be distribution, as I've already stated.

If it doesn't spit out raw data and instead changes it somehow, it's a derivative work.

I can spell out the distinction for you twice more if you still don't get it.

[–] CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Exactly! Then you agree that because chatgpt can be coerced into spitting out raw, unmodified data, distributing it is a violation of copyright. Glad we're on the same page.

You should look up the term "rhetorical question" by the way.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago

So you understand the distinction between distribution and derivative work? Great!