Of course it does. What are you going to do? Sue them?
GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
51–60 of 806 posts
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#52What keeps him from suing if he is so sure? Those pretty little licenses are a waste of storage if no one enforces them.
Money. Suing is often survival of the richest.
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am a programmer who has written extensively on my blog and HN against Copilot. I am also not a hypocrite; I do not like DALL-E or Stable Diffusion either. As a sibling comment implies, these AI tools give more power to people who control data, i.e., big companies or wealthy people, while at the same time, they take power away from individuals. Copilot is bad for society. DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are bad for soci…
I’m a programmer and a songwriter and I am not worried about these tools and I don’t think they are bad for society. What did the photograph do to the portrait artist? What did the recording do to the live musician? Here’s some highfalutin art theory on the matter, from almost a hundred years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Work_of_Art_in_the_Age_of_...
Do you know what's different about the photograph or the recording?
They are still their own separate works!
If a painter paints a person for commission, and then that person also commissions a photographer to take a picture of them, is the photographer infringing on the copyright of the painter? Absolutely not; the works are separate.
If a recording artist records a public domain song that another artist performs live, is the recording artist infringing on the live artist? Heavens, no; the works are separate.
On the other hand, these "AI's" are taking existing works and reusing them.
Say I write a song, and in that song, I use one stanza from the chorus of one of your songs. Verbatim. Would you have a copyright claim against me for that? Of course, you would!
That's what these AI's do; they copy portions and mix them. Sometimes they are not substantial portions. Sometimes, they are, with verbatim comments (code), identical structure (also code), watermarks (images), composition (also images), lyrics (songs), or motifs (also songs).
In the reverse of your painter and photographer example, we saw US courts hand down judgment against an artist who blatantly copied a photograph. [1]
Anyway, that's the difference between the tools of photography (creates a new thing) and sound recording (creates a new thing) versus AI (mixes existing things).
And yes, sound mixing can easily stray into copyright infringement. So can other copying of various copyrightable things. I'm not saying humans don't infringe; I'm saying that AI does by construction.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-hears-argu...
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#54Microsoft should just train it on all their proprietary code instead. See how sanguine they are about it then.
who said they haven't. for something to show up verbatim in the output of a textual AI model it needs to be an input many times. I wonder if the problem is not copilot, but many people using this person's code without license or credit, and copilot being trained on those pieces of code as well. copilot may just be exposing a problem rather than creating one. I don't know much about AI, and I don't use copilot.
Microsoft have a public statement that they don't use proprietary code, only public code with public licenses. They have a lot of companies as customers who uses github, and they also use a lot third-party code in their own products.
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#55Github Copilot is not AI at all, it is just a dumb code regurgitator that just sells you code you wrote on GitHub and takes all the credit for it shamelessly.
I use copilot in my work every day, but only in places where I know the code cannot be regurgitated because what I'm doing has never been done before.
I can write an HTML form, then prompt copilot to generate a serializable class that can be used to deserialize that form on the server. I can write a test for one of our internal apis, and for every subsequent test I can just write the name of what I expect it to check and it generates a test that correctly uses our internal APIs and verifies the expected behavior.
You can have problems with the ethics of how GitHub and OpenAI produced what they did, but to describe it the way that you did requires never having really attempted to use it seriously.
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#56if you're posting your code publicly on the web, its hard to get upset that people are seeing/using it
Can I introduce you to a concept called copyright?
Is it fine if an author publishes a short story publicly on the web for someone else to submit it to a contest as their own work?
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good! Large corporations shouldn’t be able to profit off of other people’s data without consent or compensation.
Great! I assume you believe all search engines should be illegal then?
Search engines don't sell the information of others; they sell certain metadata of that information, namely, the location of that information.
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#58I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI. For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged b…
I am a programmer who has written extensively on my blog and HN against Copilot. I am also not a hypocrite; I do not like DALL-E or Stable Diffusion either. As a sibling comment implies, these AI tools give more power to people who control data, i.e., big companies or wealthy people, while at the same time, they take power away from individuals. Copilot is bad for society. DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are bad for soci…
> these AI tools give more power to people who control data, i.e., big companies or wealthy people, while at the same time, they take power away from individuals.
Not sure I agree, but I can at least see the point for Copilot and DALL-E - but Stable Diffusion? It's open source, it runs on (some) home-use laptops. How is that taking away power from indies?
Just look at the sheer number of apps building on or extending SD that were published on HN, and that's probably just the tip of the iceberg. Quite a few of them at least looked like side projects by solo devs.
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
When Joe Rando plays a song from 1640 on a violin he gets a copyright claim on Youtube. When Jane Rando uses devtools to check a website source code she gets sued. When Microsoft steals all code on their platform and sells it, they get lauded. When "Open" AI steals thousands of copyrighted images and sells them, they get lauded. I am skeptical of imaginary property myself, but fuck this one set of rules for the poor,…
> Joe Rando plays a song from 1640 on a violin he gets a copyright claim on Youtube That can't possibly be a valid claim, right? AFAIK copyright is "gone" after the original author dies + ~70 years. Before fairly recently it was even shorter. Something from 1640 surely can't be claimed under copyright protection. There are much more recent changes where that might not be the case, but 1640? > When Jane Rando uses dev…
This isn't a legal copyright claim, it's a "YouTube" copyright claim which is entirely owned and enforced by YouTube.
Re: GitHub Copilot, with “public code” blocked, emits my copyrighted code
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
When Joe Rando plays a song from 1640 on a violin he gets a copyright claim on Youtube. When Jane Rando uses devtools to check a website source code she gets sued. When Microsoft steals all code on their platform and sells it, they get lauded. When "Open" AI steals thousands of copyrighted images and sells them, they get lauded. I am skeptical of imaginary property myself, but fuck this one set of rules for the poor,…
> one set of rules for the poor, another set of rules for the masses. Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. —Composer Frank Wilhoit[1] [1]: https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progre...
Thanks for posting the link to the quote. Having said that, I don't think it's possible to quote that bit and get an understanding of the idea being conveyed without it's opening context.
Indeed, it's likely to cause a false idea of what's being conveyed. From earlier in the same post:
"There is no such thing as liberalism — or progressivism, etc.
There is only conservatism. No other political philosophy actually exists; by the political analogue of Gresham’s Law, conservatism has driven every other idea out of circulation."