191–200 of 769 posts
China can't produce LLMs because of inconvenient truths.
The US can't produce LLMs because of copyright.
Decentralized open source LLMs might exist that could work, but they won't have the giant GPU clusters.
A rich country with lax rule of law wins? Maybe that's why Sam went to the Saudis?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly am I stealing if I don't take the deal, walk away and then enjoy an AI-generated artwork that just so happens to resemble the thing closely instead? I'd think that stealing requires taking something away from someone, regardless of how hard certain industries try to gaslight me into expanding the definition to protect their business model.
Stop trying to gaslight yourself into thinking what you are doing isn't morally wrong. If you do not agree with their business model, don't get involved with their business, at all. Your disagreement doesn't give you the right to exploit flaws in their methods to protect their business. Just like the fact you don't want to pay for something doesn't grant you the right to exploit the fact that the laws of physics allo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an centuries old argument. Most people don’t create to make money, they create because they __have__ to. If those motivated purely by money stop creating little of value will be lost
People that create art, must eat and sleep under a roof.
Or... things are about to get worse for copyright holders. I don't see any developped country pressing the brake on AGI in the near future to protect a few copyright holders from getting "stolen" in hypothetic scenarios.
> I don't see any developped country pressing the brake on AGI in the near future It’s already happening with EU AI Act https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/202...
It generally didn’t care about generative AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a child is instructed to read a copyrighted work at school, which later becomes a factor in his own derivative works, he won't be in breach of copyright. Why should other intelligent entities be prevented from reading copyrighted works and gaining whatever there is to gain from those works the way any human might?
thats irrelevant since an LLM is not an intelligent entity. Whatever you're arguing about is fiction.
To me that’s the wrong question. Everyone knew it was trained on copyrighted material and capable of eerily similar outputs. But it’s already done. At scale. Large corps committing fully. There is no chance of that toothpaste going back in the tube. It’s a bit like when big tech built on aggressive user data harvesting. Whether it’s right, ethical or even legal is academic at this stage. They just did it - effectivel…
Napster hit scale too.
Or... things are about to get worse for copyright holders. I don't see any developped country pressing the brake on AGI in the near future to protect a few copyright holders from getting "stolen" in hypothetic scenarios.
This is not about copyright. Think about it. Would you ever actually use generative AI to pirate something when you could just torrent it? While there may be an argument that generative AI is infringing copyright, it is not really a very good tool for it. And there is a worldwide piracy industry already causing much more financial damage due to infringement. This is really about replacement. The copyright holders in…
How do you square this with literally the first image in the OP showing side by side GPT reproing copyrighted work? imo a good modern art project would be someone making a website that “archives” NYT articles by laundering them through GPT rather than using the archive link that everyone posts to get around the paywall. Even HN guidelines bend over backwards to allow bypassing the paywall by allowing these links.
Did ClosedAi (OpenAi) ever confirm or deny that they trained their models on copyrighted materials?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
thats irrelevant since an LLM is not an intelligent entity. Whatever you're arguing about is fiction.
ChatGPT is not an intelligent entity? What’s been comprehending and rewriting all my crappy code for several months? An auto-complete? There’s obviously emergent behavior there that is actually defined by the maker and most users as “intelligence.” Edit: typo
But since you are the type of person who is seemingly using LLM "written" code in production, your ability to accurate assess anything is suspect at best.
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced, is indistinguishable from magic".
No, an LLM is not intelligent. I do not understand why people will go through mental gymnastics to conclude they are.
queue all the typical arguments supporting them being intelligent and demanding I give reasons for them not being
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ChatGPT is not an intelligent entity? What’s been comprehending and rewriting all my crappy code for several months? An auto-complete? There’s obviously emergent behavior there that is actually defined by the maker and most users as “intelligence.” Edit: typo
I would paraphrase one of Clarke's laws and say that "Any sufficiently advanced text generator is indistinguishable from an intelligent entity." Just because a computer program's output is remarkably good does not mean there is any emergent intelligence, any more than a technology we don't understand means there is magic.