• AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Obligatory: I’m anti-AI, mostly anti-technology

    That said, I can’t say that I mind LLMs using copyrighted materials that it accesses legally/appropriately (lots of copyrighted content may be freely available to some extent, like news articles or song lyrics)

    I’m open to arguments correcting me. I’d prefer to have another reason to be against this technology, not arguing on the side of frauds like Sam Altman. Here’s my take:

    All content created by humans follows consumption of other content. If I read lots of Vonnegut, I should be able to churn out prose that roughly (or precisely) includes his idiosyncrasies as a writer. We read more than one author; we read dozens or hundreds over our lifetimes. Likewise musicians, film directors, etc etc.

    If an LLM consumes the same copyrighted content and learns how to copy its various characteristics, how is it meaningfully different from me doing it and becoming a successful writer?

    • droplet6585@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      and learns how to copy its various characteristics

      Because you are a human. Not an immortal corporation.

      I am tired of people trying to have iNtElLeCtUaL dIsCuSsIoN about/with entities that would feed you feet first into a wood chipper if it thought it could profit from it.

    • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Except the reason Altman is so upset has nothing to do with this very valid discussion.

      As I commented elsewhere:

      Fuck Sam Altmann, the fartsniffer who convinced himself & a few other dumb people that his company really has the leverage to make such demands.

      He doesn’t care about democracy, he’s just scared because a chinese company offers what his company offers, but for a fraction of the price/resources.

      He’s scared for his government money and basically begging for one more handout “to save democracy”.

      Yes, I’ve been listening to Ed Zitron.

    • kibiz0r@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      If an LLM consumes the same copyrighted content and learns how to copy its various characteristics, how is it meaningfully different from me doing it and becoming a successful writer?

      That is the trillion-dollar question, isn’t it?

      I’ve got two thoughts to frame the question, but I won’t give an answer.

      1. Laws are just social constructs, to help people get along with each other. They’re not supposed to be grand universal moral frameworks, or coherent/consistent philosophies. They’re always full of contradictions. So… does it even matter if it’s “meaningfully” different or not, if it’s socially useful to treat it as different (or not)?
      2. We’ve seen with digital locks, gig work, algorithmic market manipulation, and playing either side of Section 230 when convenient… that the ethos of big tech is pretty much “define what’s illegal, so I can colonize the precise border of illegality, to a fractal level of granularity”. I’m not super stoked to come with an objective quantitative framework for them to follow, cuz I know they’ll just flow around it like water and continue to find ways to do antisocial shit in ways that technically follow the rules.
    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Right. The problem is not the fact it consumes the information, the problem is if the user uses it to violate copyright. It’s just a tool after all.

      Like, I’m capable of violating copyright in infinitely many ways, but I usually don’t.

      • SoulWager@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        The problem is that the user usually can’t tell if the AI output is infringing someone’s copyright or not unless they’ve seen all the training data.

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Yup. Violating IP licenses is a great reason to prevent it. According to current law, if they get Alice license for the book they should be able to use it how they want.
      I’m not permitted to pirate a book just because I only intend to read it and then give it back. AI shouldn’t be able to either if people can’t.

      Beyond that, we need to accept that might need to come up with new rules for new technology. There’s a lot of people, notably artists, who object to art they put on their website being used for training. Under current law if you make it publicly available, people can download it and use it on their computer as long as they don’t distribute it. That current law allows something we don’t want doesn’t mean we need to find a way to interpret current law as not allowing it, it just means we need new laws that say “fair use for people is not the same as fair use for AI training”.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 hours ago

      In your example, you could also be sued for ripping off his style.

      • Bassman1805@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 hours ago

        You can sue for anything in the USA. But it is pretty much impossible to successfully sue for “ripping off someone’s style”. Where do you even begin to define a writing style?

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          There are lots of ways to characterize writing style. Go read Finnegans Wake and tell me James Joyce doesn’t have a characteristic style.

      • MrQuallzin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Edited for clarity: If that were the case then Weird AL would be screwed.

        Original: In that case Weird AL would be screwed