Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 845 posts

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#171

Post by CPLX »

pr337h4m wrote: post #9

>Chris Lehane, OpenAI’s vice president of global affairs, said in an interview that the US AI Safety Institute – a key government group focused on AI – could act as the main point of contact between the federal government and the private sector. If companies work with the group voluntarily to review models, the government could provide them “with liability protections including preemption from state based regulations…

The fact that Chris Lehane is the one involved in this should tell you all you need to know about how on the level all this is.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#172

Post by jncfhnb »

triceratops wrote: post #145
jncfhnb wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can make copies of things. You just can’t distribute them

You're repeating upthread comments. And no, you can't. There's an archival exception for electronic media . If you want to make copies of physical media you either: 1. Can't Or 2. Rely on fair use to protect you (archival by individuals isn't necessarily fair use)

It absolutely is fair use to copy a book for your personal archives.

The fair use criteria considers whether it is commercial in nature (in this case it is not) and the “ the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work” for which a personal copy of a personally owned book is non existent.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107

You would get laughed at by the legal system trying to prosecute an individual owner for copying a book they bought just to keep.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#173

Post by anjaliNYC »

bluSCALE4 wrote: post #151
falcor84 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the best of my knowledge, no individual has ever been sued or prosecuted specifically for downloading books. As long as you're not massively sharing them with others, it's not an issue in practice. Enjoy your reading and learning.

Wow, just wow.

Truly wow. The sucking up to coroporations is terrifying. This, when Aaron Swartz was institutionally murdered by the institutions and the state for "copyright infringement". And what he did wasn't even for profit, or even a 0.00001 of the scale of the theft that OpenAI and their ilk have done.

So it's totally OK to rip off and steal and lie through your teeth AND do it all for money, if you're a company. But if you're a human being, doing it not for profit but for the betterment of your own fellow humans, you deserve to be imprisoned and systematically murdered and driven to suicide.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#174

Post by triceratops »

jncfhnb wrote: post #172
triceratops wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're repeating upthread comments. And no, you can't. There's an archival exception for electronic media . If you want to make copies of physical media you either: 1. Can't Or 2. Rely on fair use to protect you (archival by individuals isn't necessarily fair use)

It absolutely is fair use to copy a book for your personal archives. The fair use criteria considers whether it is commercial in nature (in this case it is not) and the “ the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work” for which a personal copy of a personally owned book is non existent. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107 You would get laughed at by the legal system t…

> It absolutely is fair use to copy a book for your personal archives.

There's no legal precedent for this. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43356042

> the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work

A copyright holder's lawyer would argue that having and using a photocopy of a book keeps the original from wearing out. This directly affects the potential market for the work, since the owner could resell the book in mint condition, after reading and burning their photocopies.

> You would get laughed at by the legal system trying to prosecute an individual owner for copying a book they bought just to keep.

I mean maybe this is true. But the affected individual will have a very bad year and spend a ton of money on lawyers.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#175

Post by regularjack »

diego_sandoval wrote: post #31
sega_sai wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how this "freedom to learn" should apply to models, but not real people..

I would assume that the request is for it to apply to models in the way that it currently applies to humans. If a human buys a movie, he can watch it and learn about its contents, and then talk about those contents, and he can create a similar movie with a similar theme. If OpenAI buys a movie and shows it to their model, it's unclear whether the model can talk about the contents of the movie and create a similar mov…

OpenAI didn't pay for most of the content it used.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#176

Post by affinepplan »

ivanmontillam wrote: post #125
btreecat wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think content creators want to be compensated for their work that's being used for commercial purposes. I think you're framing it in a way that makes it seem like they don't want to be compensated for working, they just want to stop other people from starting a new industry, which doesn't seem like a good faith understanding of the situation.

Business and tech idea: make it so that it's like Spotify for AI. Everytime an answer is drawn from "certain learned weights," make it so that the source of that knowledge is paid cents per volume.

yeah this sounds like it'll be reliably enforced for sure

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#177

Post by arrosenberg »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #123
arrosenberg wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Course if a company hosts in us-east-1, and allows access from California, would the inter state commerce clause not take effect and California would have no power anyways? California can't legislate how they serve a customer in a different state. They would have to comply when serving California customers within the state of California, regardless of where the dc is located. I.E. Under the CCPA it doesn't matter w…

>California can't legislate how they serve a customer in a different state. They would have to comply when serving California customers within the state of California, regardless of where the dc is located. I.E. Under the CCPA it doesn't matter where my data is stored, they still have to delete it upon my request. I know this is what California thinks, I just personally don't see how this isn't inter state commerce.

Unless their a superseding federal law, yeah, California can successfully prosecute businesses for breaking the laws within its' jurisdiction.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#178

Post by drdaeman »

triceratops wrote: post #128
School-Cotton wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But individuals can face serious consequences for obtaining it illegally. Can they? Who has ever faced serious consequences for pirating books in the US?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz (Please no pedantry about how scientific papers aren't books)

Not to diminish the atrocity of what happened to Aaron, but is this a highly abnormal case of prosecutor overzeal or is it common for people to be charged and held liable for downloading and/or consuming (without distribution) of copyrighted materials (in any form) without obtaining a license?

Asking because I genuinely don't know. I believe all I've ever read about persecution of "commonplace" copyright violations was either about distributors or tied to bidirectional nature of peer-to-peer exchange (torrents typically upload to others even as you download = redistribution).

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#179

Post by yieldcrv »

jlev wrote: post #135
falcor84 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the best of my knowledge, no individual has ever been sued or prosecuted specifically for downloading books. As long as you're not massively sharing them with others, it's not an issue in practice. Enjoy your reading and learning.

Aaron Swartz, cofounder of Reddit and inventor of RSS and Markdown, was hounded to death by an overzealous prosecutor for downloading articles from JSTOR, with the intent to learn from them. He was charged with over a million dollars in fines and could have faced 35 years in prison. He and Sam Altman were in the same YC class. OpenAI is doing the same thing at a larger scale, and their technology actually reproduces…

It was overzealous prosecution of the breaking into a closet to wire up some ethernet cables to gain access to the materials

Not the downloading with intent

And apparently the most controversial take on this community is the observation that many people would have done the trial, plea and time, regardless of how overzealous the prosecution was

Post reply on HN