55
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by evlogii@lemm.ee to c/nix@programming.dev
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 months ago

Anti Commercial-AI license

Is this nonsense spreading? Stop trying to bring back forum signatures mixed with 'I do not give Facebook permission, repost this before midnight.' Legally, practically, and morally, it is incorrect.

If you could reserve those rights, they would be so by default.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 2 points 2 months ago

OpenAI et al. will just put "No copyright infringment intended" on everything and it will all be fine.

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Honestly, that'd be equally valid.

Properly mangling information through a deep neural network is about as transformative as fair use gets. Doing it wrong and just storing data is a failure case. (And it suggests a lot of wasted effort, where that data could be referenced instead of trained. Ideally we could show the LLM a new textbook and have it explain by reading, rather than stirring the textbook into the zillion-dollar back-end process that created it.)

The loudest critics may not even know what they want. Guys: you expect the robot to answer specific questions about the US constitution and the characters in Harry Potter, while incapable of quoting from exactly one of them? Like it should mumble its way through paraphrasing "Yer a wizard... Barry," but if it gets one word wrong in the second amendment then it's useless. We finally created a machine that speaks English and people are mad it doesn't immediately grasp copyright law. When most people don't.

this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
55 points (93.7% liked)

Nix / NixOS

1465 readers
7 users here now

Main links

Videos

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS