41–50 of 326 posts
I really wish we could get rid of copyright. It's going to hold us back long term.
I’m personally more in favor of significantly reducing the length of the copy right. I think 20-30 years is an interesting range. Artist get roughly a career length of time to profit off their creations, but there is much less incentive for major corporations to buy and horde IP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's got nothing to do with it. It's all about copyright. Can it reproduce its training data verbatim? If so, Meta is in hot water.
I read harry potter, and you ask me about a page, and I can recite it verbatim, did I just commit copyright infringement?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's got nothing to do with it. It's all about copyright. Can it reproduce its training data verbatim? If so, Meta is in hot water.
I read harry potter, and you ask me about a page, and I can recite it verbatim, did I just commit copyright infringement?
It's important to note the way it was measured: > the paper estimates that Llama 3.1 70B has memorized 42 percent of the first Harry Potter book well enough to reproduce 50-token excerpts at least half the time As I understand it, it means if you prompt it with some actual context from a specific subset that is 42% of the book, it completes it with 50 tokens from the book, 50% of the time. So 50 tokens is not really…
As I've said several times, the corpus is key: LLMs thus far "read" most anything, but should instead have well-curated corpora. "Garbage In, Garbage Out!(GIGO)" is the saying. While the Harry Potter series may be fun reading, it doesn't provide information about anything that isn't better covered elsewhere. Leave Harry Potter for a different "Harry Potter LLM". Train scientific LLMs to the level of a good early 20th…
To address this point, and not other concerns: the benefits would be (1) pop culture knowledge and (2) having a variety of styles of edited/reasonably good-quality prose.
From a quick web search I can find that there are book review sites that allow users to enter and rate verbatim "quotes" from books. This one [1] contains ~2000 [2] portions of a sentence, a paragraph or several paragraphs of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. Could it be plausible that an LLM had ingested parts of the book via scrapping web pages like this and not the full copyrighted book and get results simila…
Sure, why not? lol https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1entowq/i_made... https://github.com/shloop/google-book-scraper The fact that Meta torrented Books3 and other datasets seems to be by self-admission by Meta employees who performed the work and/or oversaw those who themselves did the work, so that is not really under dispute or ambiguous. https://torrentfreak.com/meta-admits-use-of-pirated-book-dat...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's got nothing to do with it. It's all about copyright. Can it reproduce its training data verbatim? If so, Meta is in hot water.
I read harry potter, and you ask me about a page, and I can recite it verbatim, did I just commit copyright infringement?
It's important to note the way it was measured: > the paper estimates that Llama 3.1 70B has memorized 42 percent of the first Harry Potter book well enough to reproduce 50-token excerpts at least half the time As I understand it, it means if you prompt it with some actual context from a specific subset that is 42% of the book, it completes it with 50 tokens from the book, 50% of the time. So 50 tokens is not really…
This sounds almost like "Works every time (50% of the time)."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the physical encoding which definitely exists in my brain is a copyright violation First of all, we don't really know how the brain works. I get that you're being a snarky physicalist, but there's plenty of substance dualists, panpsychsts, etc. out there. So, some might say, this is a reductive description of what happens in our brains. Second of all, yes, if you tried to publish Harry Potter ( even if it was from…
Right but the physical encoding already exists in my brain or how can I reproduce it in the first place? We may not know how the encoding works but we do know that an encoding exists because a decoding is possible. My question is… is that in itself a violation of copyright? If not then as long as LLMs don’t make a publication it shouldn’t be a copyright violation right? Because we don’t understand how it’s encoded in…
I can recall about 12% of the first Harry Potter book so it's interesting to see Llama is only 4x smarter than me. I will catch up.