901–910 of 912 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My code was AGPL. OpenAI can go to h..l (Footnote: I like your poem. It conveys the concept much better than anywhere I'd ever seen before)
Thanks, but it's not my poem! You can find it here: https://blog.ninapaley.com/2009/12/15/minute-meme-1-copying-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the solutions haven't arrived. neither have changes in lieu of having solutions. "trying" isn't an actual, present, functional change. and it just gets passed around as an excuse for companies to keep doing whatever they're doing.
Please recall how much the world changed in just the last year. What would be your expected timescale for the solution of this particular problem and why is it more important than instilling models with the ability to logically plan and answer correctly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Now displaying 3 citations out of ~150,000,000.." [1] http://web.archive.org/web/20120608192927/http://www.google.... [2] https://steemit.com/online/@jaroli/how-google-search-result-... [3] https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/09/search-results-desi... [4] Next page :)
This is not answering the GP question and does not count as a satisfactory ranked citation list. The first one is particularly dubious. Also you didn’t clarify which statement was based on which citation. I didn’t see “dog” in your text. To help understand the complexity of an LLM consider that these models typically hold about 10,000 less parameters than the total characters in the training data. If one wants to ins…
Yeah, good luck embedding citations into that. Everyone here saying it's easy needs to go earn their 7 figure comp at an AI company instead of wasting their time educating us dummies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reproduction of that material in an educational setting is protected by Fair Use.
I don't think that is relevant to my comment. Whether the material is purchased, borrowed from a library, or legally reproduced under "fair use", I'm still asserting that I don't "owe" the creators any of my profit that I earn from taking advantage of what I learned.
Take a college student who scans all her textbooks, relying on fair use. If she is the only user, is she obligated to pay a premium for mining?
What about the scenario in which she sells that engine to other book owners? What if they only owned the book a short time in school?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? This is about whether one country wants to cede a massive economic advantage to another country.
On the other hand, you could also argue that if AI takes all financial incentives from professionals to produce original works, then the AI will lose out on quality material to train on and become worse. Unless your argument is there’s no need for anything else created by humanity, everything worth reading has already been written, and humanity has peaked and everyone should stop? Like all things, it’s about finding…
> OpenAI had no role in the creation of this content, yet with minimal prompting, will recite large portions of it verbatim.
This is the smoking gun. GPT-4 is a large model and hence highly likely to reproduce content. They have many such examples in the court filing https://nytco-assets.nytimes.com/2023/12/NYT_Complaint_Dec20...
IANAL but that's a slam dunk of copyright violation.
NYT will likely win.
Also why OpenAI should not go YOLO scaling up to GPT-5 which will likely recite more copyrighted content. More parameters, more memorization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And god willing if there is any justice in the courts NYTimes will lose this frivolous lawsuit. Copyright law is a prehistoric and corrupt system that has been about protecting the profit margins of Disney and Warner Bros rather than protecting real art and science for living memory. Unless copy/paste superhero movies are your definition of art I suppose. Unfortunately it seems like judges and the general public are…
> Copyright law is a prehistoric and corrupt system that has been about protecting the profit margins of Disney and Warner Bros rather than protecting real art These types of arguments miss the mark entirely imho. First and foremost, not every instance of copyrighted creation involves a giant corporation. Second, what you are arguing against is the unfair leverage corporations have when negotiating a deal with a risi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? Because the GPT-3 paper talks about "...two internet-based books corpora (Books1 and Books2)..." (see pages 8 and 9) - https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.14165.pdf Unclear what that corpora might be, or if its the same books2 you are referring to.
My guess is that this poster meant books3, not books2. books1 and books2 are OpenAI corpuses that have never (to my knowledge) had their content revealed. books3 is public, developed outside of OpenAI and we know exactly what's in it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that is relevant to my comment. Whether the material is purchased, borrowed from a library, or legally reproduced under "fair use", I'm still asserting that I don't "owe" the creators any of my profit that I earn from taking advantage of what I learned.
The parent comment asks whether an “engine” trained on copyrighted data is entitled to decide profit. Your comment is about a human receiving knowledge that facilitates profit. Of course, these are legally independent scenarios. Take a college student who scans all her textbooks, relying on fair use. If she is the only user, is she obligated to pay a premium for mining? What about the scenario in which she sells that…