this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
787 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

58028 readers
3375 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
 

OpenAI now tries to hide that ChatGPT was trained on copyrighted books, including J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series::A new research paper laid out ways in which AI developers should try and avoid showing LLMs have been trained on copyrighted material.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TropicalDingdong 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If these record label types impede public culture then they are antithetical to copyright

I take that same argument and extend it to the impediment of any idea.

[–] elbarto777 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The thing is that, for the AI to be trained on Harry Potter, someone must have bought the book.

I wouldn't be opposed to use an AI and tell it "here. Read this book that I bought. Summarize it for me." That would be fair game.

But if I ask an AI "did you read Harry Potter? What can you tell me about Voldemort?" That means the AI consumed the book.

Granted, someone on the internet could publish an essay about Voldemort and bake it available to everyone, so, hmmm..... you may have a point. May.

[–] TropicalDingdong 1 points 1 year ago

Sure. That follows. I guess the point I'm considering is more broad. If you've sold some one a copy of a book, you've given up ownership of the information in the book. If you truly don't want that information out there, don't sell the book. Its an extreme take, but I don't believe that ideas can be property in the same way as a shoe (or rather, I believe maybe they are in-fact the same kind of property as a shoe. You can't own the principal of a shoe, simply the shoe its self.)