All public GitHub code was used in training Copilot • Hacker News Board

Re: All public GitHub code was used in training Copilot

#731

Post by feanaro » Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 9:08 PM UTC

0-_-0 wrote: post #350

feanaro wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the recent Github v. youtube-dl fiasco happened, I remember reading similarly strongly-worded but dismissive comments regarding fair use, stating how it is quite obvious that youtube-dl's test code could never be fair use and how fair use itself is a vague, shaky, underspecified provision of the copyright law which cannot ever be relied on. To me, seeing youtube-dl's case as fair use is so much easier than using…

How would you feel about a paid-for search engine using hundreds of millios of web pages without permission in order to build a proprietary product ?

Somehow building a list of pointers to original content does simply not have the same ring to me as a product that rehashes all of the content. A rehashing of content sounds to me much more like, for example, publishing a sequel to my favourite book. After all, a sequel is just a rehashing of the same characters in new adventures. If we can't do that, why should Copilot be fine?

My point was however that I'm just utterly failing to see how the youtube-dl test thing could be more of a copyright problem than this entire thing based on millions of others' works that is Copilot.

Re: All public GitHub code was used in training Copilot

#732

Post by cnity » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 8:37 AM UTC

Eikon wrote: post #283

cnity wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic there is no such thing as AI.

There's no such thing as AI.

Can you expand on this? Clearly the term exists. I have a degree in AI, do the concepts I learned at university not exist? What does you mean when you say AI does not exist?

Do you mean that the terms, algorithms, concepts, and applications found in the field labelled "Artificial Intelligence" should not be called as such?

I have a feeling you are simply playing a semantic game, though, in which case we are likely to talk past each other.

Edit: I suspect you may be conflating artificial general intelligence[0] with AI

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_general_intelligenc...

Re: All public GitHub code was used in training Copilot

#733

Post by dpe82 » Tue, Jul 20, 2021, 3:15 AM UTC

jcelerier wrote: post #374

dpe82 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or if you simply read GPL code and learn something from it - or bits of the code are retained verbatim in your memory, are you (as a person) now GPL'd? Obviously not.

> Or if you simply read GPL code and learn something from it - or bits of the code are retained verbatim in your memory, are you (as a person) now GPL'd? Obviously not. I do not find that to be obvious at all.

You do not find it obvious that a human being would not become a GPL'd work?

Re: All public GitHub code was used in training Copilot

#734

Post by tvirosi » Tue, Jul 20, 2021, 6:21 PM UTC

fleddr wrote: post #551

To me, the particular use case and whether it is fair use or not, is of minor interest. A far more pressing matter is at hand: AI centralization and monopolization. Take Google as an example, running Google Photos for free for several years. And now that this has sucked in a trillion photos, the AI job is done, and they likely have the best image recognition AI in existence. Which is of course still peanuts compared…

I largely agree. But there are still some fun opportunities around. One are things google would never touch because of PR reasons (e.g. state of the art scalable face identification). Another is just silly out-of-the-box creative uses of AI which wouldn't fit well with Google's brand.