this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
354 points (91.7% liked)

Technology

59674 readers
4905 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
L3s
[email protected]
[email protected]
L4s
enu
354
Hot take: LLM technology is being purposefully framed as AI to avoid accountability (self.technology)
submitted 1 year ago by assassin_aragorn to c/technology
94 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Which of the following sounds more reasonable?

  • I shouldn't have to pay for the content that I use to tune my LLM model and algorithm.

  • We shouldn't have to pay for the content we use to train and teach an AI.

By calling it AI, the corporations are able to advocate for a position that's blatantly pro corporate and anti writer/artist, and trick people into supporting it under the guise of a technological development.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kklusz 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What about LLM generated content that was then edited by a human? Surely authors shouldn't lose copyright over an entire book just because they enlisted the help of LLMs for the first draft.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you take open source code using GNU GPL and modify it, it retains the GNU GPL license. It's like saying it's fine to take a book and just change some words and it's totally not plagerism.

[–] kklusz 2 points 1 year ago

Public domain is not infectious like GPL is. That being said, it seems like the parent comment has already mentioned this case, now that I’ve read them again:

public domain content can already be edited and combined and arranged to create copyrighted content

That’s fine by me. The important thing is that humans can still use AI as a legally recognized productivity tool, including using it as a way to use ideas and styles generated by other humans.