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

611–620 of 845 posts

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

#611

Post by codedokode »

glimshe wrote: post #595
austin-cheney wrote: post #584

A slippery slope to eliminate copyright out right. The argument made is that AI is somehow more special and will otherwise lose to competition with China. The flaw there is that AI is not more special than any other endeavor while all other American markets must equally compete with China. What that failure means is that when anything is exceptional then everything becomes exceptional because the economic conditions…

Copyrights are more often used to defend large corporations than small creators. As long everybody has a level playing field and individuals benefit from weaker copyright laws, it might actually make the world a better place. I'm not arguing for the complete elimination of copyright protections, but today's laws, in particular copyright duration, are immoral. This is as good of a starting point as any assuming OpenAI…

In a billion dollar company can use pirated books for a business, should we allow them to use pirated software too? Do you think that requiring a company to pay for Windows license is "immoral"?

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

#613

Post by antonkar »

Basically stole almost whole output of humanity both dead and alive, put it in their Frankenstein Monsters’ ever growing brains and now want to let em roam unsupervised longer and longer (AI agents) and continue to steal things.

Taking away human freedoms and giving em to agents 101

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

#614

Post by chithanh »

karn97 wrote: post #578
chithanh wrote: post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At this point I'm honestly wondering if they aren't just using the interview process to generate high quality validation data for free. Not sure if that is accurate, but one of the reasons why DeepSeek R1 performs so well in certain areas is thought to be access to China's Gaokao (university entrance exam) data.

Thats stupid. same as indias IIT advanced for ex. You learn all that stuff in year 1 physics and math in uni.

Yes, however you also want to distinguish correct from incorrect answers. You get that from the exams, not from year 1 textbooks.

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

#615

Post by jemmyw »

faragon wrote: post #587

If a person can read copyrighted material and produce derivative works, why not an AI?

Because the AI is not a person. It doesn't seem like we're anywhere near AGI that could be considered a person. Training an LLM is taking existing content and transforming it into another format for later consumption by a person. That person can run prompts against the LLM to create derivative work, the LLM itself doesn't run prompts or do anything at all.

I don't know much about the legal side, but it seems to me, from the above, that the laws for copyright for LLMs should apply to the company training the LLM as if they're creating a derivative work that they will later sell or license for other people to interact with.

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

#616

Post by actionfromafar »

codedokode wrote: post #611
glimshe wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyrights are more often used to defend large corporations than small creators. As long everybody has a level playing field and individuals benefit from weaker copyright laws, it might actually make the world a better place. I'm not arguing for the complete elimination of copyright protections, but today's laws, in particular copyright duration, are immoral. This is as good of a starting point as any assuming OpenAI…

In a billion dollar company can use pirated books for a business, should we allow them to use pirated software too? Do you think that requiring a company to pay for Windows license is "immoral"?

Of course, how else could we train the neural networks to run the programs?

/largest_company

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

#618

Post by avgd »

ch4s3 wrote: post #188

I'm surprised to see only one comment here addressing the issue of Chinese AI companies just flatly ignoring US copyright and IP laws/norms. I wonder if there is a viable path where we can facilitate some sort of economic remuneration for people who write and create visual art while not giving up the game to Chinese companies. This seems to be a thorny dilemma.

> Chinese AI companies just flatly ignoring US copyright

It is increasingly tiresome to see this clearly racist bias at work when every US company doing AI has been acting the same way.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...

https://piracymonitor.org/chat-gpt-trained-using-pirated-e-b...

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

#620

Post by thedevilslawyer »

codedokode wrote: post #611
glimshe wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyrights are more often used to defend large corporations than small creators. As long everybody has a level playing field and individuals benefit from weaker copyright laws, it might actually make the world a better place. I'm not arguing for the complete elimination of copyright protections, but today's laws, in particular copyright duration, are immoral. This is as good of a starting point as any assuming OpenAI…

In a billion dollar company can use pirated books for a business, should we allow them to use pirated software too? Do you think that requiring a company to pay for Windows license is "immoral"?

Ideally, software shouldn't be copyrightable, or patent-able. It's what FOSS is based on (couldn't remove copyright, so let's hack it via copyleft).
Post reply on HN