Live data from Hacker News

AI is just unauthorised plagiarism at a bigger scale

axelk.ee

41–50 of 783 posts

Re: AI is just unauthorised plagiarism at a bigger scale

#41
post #5

People were effectively copying websites (especially ecommerce tutorials) and beating the original authors at SEO decades before ChatGPT 2.

There’s a world of difference between people simply “copying websites” and providing tools that, along with other kinds of plagiarism[0], do so at scale while benefitting from that commercially.

Sure, you can do the same thing with people, but it’s 1) time-consuming, 2) expensive, 3) prone to whitleblowers refusing to do the shady thing, 4) prone to any competent and productive person involved quitting to do something worthwhile and more profitable instead.

[0] Mind you, “copying websites” is but a drop in the ocean in the grand scale of things.

Re: AI is just unauthorised plagiarism at a bigger scale

#45

> their article contains links to my actual website, with the exact link text (?!) I'm having a hard time understanding what's wrong here? Unless the link text is very long, why would someone linking to your article use different words for the link text?

I think they probably had the section header link back to their webpage, or something similar to that. This is not a well-written rant.

Re: AI is just unauthorised plagiarism at a bigger scale

#46
Seriously how is this surprising? We all know AI companies stole troves of data to train their models, why do you think they'll stop? Have they faced consequences for the mass theft of copyrighted data?

You can't steal or profit off of that data, but it's fine for them for whatever reason. I guess because they're a force for good in the world and are pushing humanity forward eh?

Re: AI is just unauthorised plagiarism at a bigger scale

#47
I do just want to highlight that this is also what humans do. We read a bunch of content online and then use it in our work product. The vast majority of the value that I provide comes from copyrighted information that I have ingested - either directly with a payment to the creator (bought and read the book, paid for and attended the seminar) or indirectly via third party blog posts or summaries where I did not then pay the originator of the materials.

I think there are real questions around motivations for creation of novel, high quality valuable content (I think they still exist but move to indirect monetization for some content and paywalls for high value materials).

I don't inherently have any problems with agents (or humans) ingesting content and using it in work product. I think we just need to accept that the landscape is changing and ensure we think through the reasons why and how content is created and monetized.

Post reply on HN