401–408 of 408 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True. But if I was a judge I might want to consult AI to get a "neutral" opinion.
AI "neutrality" is a mirage. Hopefully the Supreme Court justices are smart enough to know that.
This has the potential to kill open source, or at least the most restrictive licenses (GPL, AGPL, ...): if a license no longer protects software from unwanted use, the only possible strategy is to make the development closed source.
Yes, this is the reason I've completely stopped releasing any open-source projects. I'm discovering that newer models are somewhat capable of reverse-engineering even compiled WebAssembly, etc. too, so I can feel a sort of "dark forest theory" taking hold. Why publish anything - open or closed - to be ripped off at negligible marginal cost?
In a way we physical things were before. Are software patents the solution? Patents are one of the reasons why open hardware is not a bigger thing. I feel that this part of AI will move thing backwards.
Another alternative would turning around the evidence requirement and ask everyone for full provenance on inputs: no clue how this could ever work. This one only became evident because the 'author' voluntarily provided the evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes if you are solving the exact problem that the original code solved and that original code was labeled as solving that exact problem then that’s very good reason for the LLM to produce that code. Researchers have shown that an LLM was able to reproduce the verbatim text of the first 4 Harry Potter books with 96% accuracy.
> that an LLM was able to reproduce the verbatim text of the first 4 Harry Potter books with 96% accuracy. Kinda weird argument, in their research ( https://forum.gnoppix.org/t/researchers-extract-up-to-96-of-... ) LLM was explicitly asked to reproduce the book. There are people that can do so without LLMs out there, by this logic everything they write is a copyright infringement an every book they can reproduce. > Y…
It’s the same as when you ask a model to generate an Italian plumber with overalls and it produces something close enough to Mario to be a copyright violation.
If you ask it to solve a very specific problem for which there is a solution well represented in its train set, you can definitely get back enough verbatim snippets to cause problems.
It’s also not a theoretical problem, you can Google for studies showing real world production of verbatim code with non-adversarial prompts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes if you are solving the exact problem that the original code solved and that original code was labeled as solving that exact problem then that’s very good reason for the LLM to produce that code. Researchers have shown that an LLM was able to reproduce the verbatim text of the first 4 Harry Potter books with 96% accuracy.
This is not an argument against coding in a different language, though. It would be like having it restate Harry Potter in a different language with different main character names, and reshuffled plot points.
Reshuffling plot points is doing a lot of lifting here. Just looking at a specific chapter near the end of the book, if you change the the order of the trials, change the names, and translate it into a different language, you’re still going to have a very hard time arguing that what you’ve produced isn’t a derivative work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI "neutrality" is a mirage. Hopefully the Supreme Court justices are smart enough to know that.
Hopefully. If they are smart they know that everybody can be wrong, therefore it is good to hear differing opinions and argumentation from multiple sources, in important matters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Derivative works can also run afoul of copyright. An LLM trained on a corpus of copyrighted code is creating derivative works no matter how obscure the process is.
Judge Alsup -- U.S. District Judge William Alsup said Anthropic made "fair use" of books, deeming it "exceedingly transformative." "Like any reader aspiring to be a writer, Anthropic's LLMs trained upon works not to race ahead and replicate or supplant them — but to turn a hard corner and create something different"
Just start with Microsoft, Oracle and Qualcomm licensed software. /s
The folks at https://malus.sh seem to think it's fine.