291–300 of 545 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it sparks the necessary discussions I don't care if it was written by Joe Random Nobody or Joe Biden. > It's just posted(not by the guy that made the page, mind you) Others would complain if the author himself had posted this.
The necessary discussion was already sparked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, to verify, your claim is that GPT-3, when trained on a corpus of human text, isn't merely managing to string together a bunch of high-probability sequences of symbol constructs--which is how every article I have ever read on how it functions describes the technology--but is instead managing to build a model of the human world and the mechanism of narration required to describe it, with which it uses to write new…
What? I don't think I made any claim of the sort. I'm claiming that it does more than mere regurgitation and has done some amount of abstraction, not that it has human-level understanding. As an example, GPT-3 learned some arithmetic and can solve basic math problems not in its training set. This is beyond pattern matching and replication, IMO. I'm not really sure why we should consider Copilot legally different from…
It appears that GitHub wishes to address this issue via UI changes to Copilot. A quote from a recent post on GitHub[0]:
> When a suggestion contains snippets copied from the training set, the UI should simply tell you where it’s quoted from. You can then either include proper attribution or decide against using that code altogether.
> This duplication search is not yet integrated into the technical preview, but we plan to do so. And we will both continue to work on decreasing rates of recitation, and on making its detection more precise.
That post is also on the Hacker News front page right now[1], but has 10% of the upvotes as this post so it's less visible.
I'm hoping all the criticism will encourage GitHub to make a better product.
[0]: https://docs.github.com/en/github/copilot/research-recitatio...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Reading some copyrighted code can have you entirely excluded from some jobs What provision of copyright law are you referring to? Are you conflating copyright law with arbitrary organizational policies?
Who said it was a law?
I'm glad that Copilot is bringing the grey areas of copyright into discussion. If I write a book and it is copyright, what's the smallest unit which is covered by that copyright? Each word is obviously not. Some sentences will be fairly generic and I will not be the first person to write them. But some sentences will be characteristic of the work or my own style. Clearly how we apply copyright to subdivisions of an o…
There is no defending copyright. It is indefensible from first principles. It makes no logical sense.
Though it sure has proven to be a profitable con.
I've given thousands of hours to open source projects, I really think open source is a pillar of modern society. So you would think I am all for something like copilot, but no. At first I thought this was a great feature, because easier access to code, but after some reflection, I am also very skeptical. I am able to make my code open source, because I can make a living out of it, and I have a lot of open source code…
> have a lot of open source code that I love to share for things like education or private stuff, but if you want to use it for something real, you need to hire me. If you can suck all the code without even I noticing it, that's not fair Co-pilot aside, that's already how it works today. If you make something open source, I can use your code to power my business, and I'm under no obligation to hire you. It's great wh…
"Open source" isn't a license. You're not allowed to just use any open source software that doesn't contain a license by default.
Feels like everyone is missing the point: Copilot will ultimately serve to weaken the arguments in support of software patents and copyright. That can only be a good thing for society (though perhaps not for rent seekers).
50% is anti-big-tech and 20% is our fear of being made redundant.
Why is this noteworthy? Who is this person? Am I missing something? I agree that there needs to be talk about licensing and copyright but with so "less/no content" there can be no meaningful discussion other than aimless banter.
Why is this comment noteworthy? Who is this person? Am I missing something?
I've given thousands of hours to open source projects, I really think open source is a pillar of modern society. So you would think I am all for something like copilot, but no. At first I thought this was a great feature, because easier access to code, but after some reflection, I am also very skeptical. I am able to make my code open source, because I can make a living out of it, and I have a lot of open source code…
> have a lot of open source code that I love to share for things like education or private stuff, but if you want to use it for something real, you need to hire me. If you can suck all the code without even I noticing it, that's not fair Co-pilot aside, that's already how it works today. If you make something open source, I can use your code to power my business, and I'm under no obligation to hire you. It's great wh…