471–480 of 623 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good news! LLM output cannot be copyrighted. Everything that an LLM produces is automatically, irrevocably, in the public domain.
What if you used the LLM to generate works that were already copyrighted?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not at all obvious whether copyright net protects or destroys the little guy. It definitely does some of both, and we have no obvious measure or counterfactual to know otherwise. You also have to take into account not just if optimal reform or optimal dismantle is better, but the realistic likelihood of each, and the risk of the bad outcomes from each. Protect even more conceptual product ideas seems pretty stro…
> It's not at all obvious whether copyright net protects or destroys the little guy. It's super obvious, unless your perspective basically stems from someone who was mad they couldn't BitTorrent a ton of movies. I mean, FFS, copyright is the literal foundation for open source licenses like the GPL. My sense is a lot of the radically anti-IP fervor ultimately stems from people who were outraged they could be sued for…
Yes it is a genius move that copy left used copyright to achieve their goal. But the name is literally reflecting the judo going on in that case. Copyleft licenses also does have a lot benefits to big companies as well too so it's not strictly a David vs Goliath victory.
I don't think it's a commonly held belief that copyright benefits small YouTube creators more than it hurts them as a concrete example, they seem to live in constant fear of being destroyed in an asymmetrical system where copyright can take away they livelihood at any moment while not doing anything to meaningfully protect it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I really don't think we want APIs to be protected by IP. But in this case it isn't just the API, there were also tests involved. I think you could make a pretty strong argument that if you used a test suite to get an agent to implement some code, the code is a derivative product of the test code.
[dead]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How long until this thing is good enough to clone photoshop? Or Skyrim? I think all bets are off for the software world.
Automatic QA/testing becomes the main challenge, so probably a ways off. How do you "specify" Skyrim?
> If source code can now be generated from a specification, the specification is where the essential intellectual content of a GPL project resides. Our foreparents fought for the right to implement works-a-like to corporate software packages, even if the so-called owners did not like it. We're ready to throw it all away, and let intellectual property owners get so much more control. The implications will not end up b…
We should be removing IP law entirely, not strengthening it to cover entire classes of problem even when implemented entirely differently. Same for anyone trying to claim "colorful monster creatures" as innately Pokemon IP. Just because someone climbed a mountain first doesn't mean they own it forever. Nobody should be honouring any of these claims. Nor should we be treating AI models themselves as respected IP. They…
If we remove IP laws, we should remove all private property laws!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US it isn't the sweat of the brow, but rather a minimal threshold of human creativity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_St...
Oh, good point. It's not related at all to effort then. Either way it still has to be a human.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s several large settlements that say Anthropomorphic/OAI didn’t want to have legal precedent. In general if it’s not outright regurgitated it would be derivative.
The out of court settlements that avoid precedent don't mean anything in a broader legal context. Legally speaking, right now in the USA, output of LLMs is not copyrighted and cannot be copyrighted (without substantial transformation by a human). I don't think this means the same thing as whether or not LLM output can infringe on someone else's copyright though (that does pose an interesting question -- can something…
For SQLite the actual product is the test-suite and the audits.
Sure you can use the code all you like, but you only ever get past quality gates if you use the audited and provably tested version.
This becomes just more relevant in the age of ai coding, where an agent might be able to reimplement your specs.
Keep your code open, but consider moving your tests.
The really interesting question to me is if this transcends copyright and unravels the whole concept of intellectual property. Because all of it is premised on an assumption that creativity is "hard". But LLMs are not just writing software, they are rapidly being engineered to operate completely generally as knowledge creation engines: solving math proofs, designing drugs, etc. So: once it's not "hard" any more, does…
Any example of that? So far I haven't seen any but maybe I'm looking at the wrong places.
I've see a lot of :
- "solving" math proofs that were properly formalized, with often numerous documented past attempts, re-verified by proper mathematicians, without necessarily any interesting results
- haven't seen any designed trust, most I've seen was (again with entire teams of experts behind) finding slight optimizations
Basically all outputs I've seen so far have been both following existing trends (basically low hanging fruits without any paradigm shift) and never ever alone but rather as search supports for teams of World class experts. None of these that would quality IMHO as knowledge creation. Whenever such results were published the publication seemed mostly to be promotion about the workflow itself more than the actual results. DeepMind seems to be the prime example for that.
PS: for the epistemological distinction you can see a few past comments of mine (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47011884 )
> If source code can now be generated from a specification, the specification is where the essential intellectual content of a GPL project resides. Our foreparents fought for the right to implement works-a-like to corporate software packages, even if the so-called owners did not like it. We're ready to throw it all away, and let intellectual property owners get so much more control. The implications will not end up b…