Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others • Hacker News Board

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#61

Post by puppycodes » Tue, Mar 25, 2025, 3:35 AM UTC

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #58

puppycodes wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. But I think we are operating on a different premise. My critique is wider and includes capitalism as a system, too much to cover in a reply on HN but idealogically it boils down to entitled thinking where people feel they are the protagonist and somehow "unique" among all other human beings and then expect to become a landlord for ideas. There are lots of ways to create capital and profit without being a…

Granted, if we were operating in an entirely different economic system, my points may be moot. I don't much see the need for our current copyright or patent law in a post-scarcity Star-Trek society, for example. Although even then, I still don't discount the need for some legal protection on creative works (e.g. the right to be known as the author).

There is always some middle ground that makes sense with things like this and i'm sure there are exceptions like there are to any rule but i'm just trying to dream a little bigger...

at the same time point out that people love to apply the idea of physical objects to a digital world and I wish they would just stop trying to put the square peg in the round hole.

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#62

Post by pllbnk » Tue, Mar 25, 2025, 8:22 AM UTC

puppycodes wrote: post #49

bernb wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Put 10,000 hours into writing a book. Watch somebody with more resources or media coverage take full credits for it and/or make money instead of yourself. Copyright is a good thing. Same principle applies to the core of similar laws.

but literally no one is doing that in this scenario so... huh? Also the number of hours you put into a thing does not make it valuable.

No one is taking credit, but no one is giving credit either, which is nearly the same.

Also, to your second point, when you (speaking of any regular person) put in the number of hours, it might not be valuable. When the domain expert puts in the same number of hours, it might be very valuable.

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#63

Post by puppycodes » Tue, Mar 25, 2025, 8:11 PM UTC

pllbnk wrote: post #62

puppycodes wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but literally no one is doing that in this scenario so... huh? Also the number of hours you put into a thing does not make it valuable.

No one is taking credit, but no one is giving credit either, which is nearly the same. Also, to your second point, when you (speaking of any regular person) put in the number of hours, it might not be valuable. When the domain expert puts in the same number of hours, it might be very valuable.

Sorry but no... theres no coorelation between value and lets call it effort over time. If a hole expert spends 10,000 hours digging a hole your left with... a hole.

If you have ever made an artwork you will know this fact in your bones.

Does a furniture maker credit the lumber yard?

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#64

Post by CamperBob2 » Fri, Apr 04, 2025, 4:45 PM UTC

throwaway150 wrote: post #21

OneDeuxTriSeiGo wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should it be fair use? Why would being a derivative work not be OK? There is a massive corpus of public domain and FOSS works. Likewise plenty of permissively licensed government created datasets. There is no reason why any corpus created from these sources is insufficient.

> Why would being a derivative work not be OK? That's not even the real problem. It's a problem, yes, but not the real problem. The problem is that before they could train the model on the book, they had to copy the book from somewhere. Is it ok to make illegal pirated copies of a copyrighted book to train your model? I think that's the issue we are dealing with here. Whether it is ok to create a derivative work or n…

The problem is that before they could train the model on the book, they had to copy the book from somewhere.

That, in itself, raises kind of an interesting point.

Right now there's a post on the front page where people are exercising conspicuous outrage because ChatGPT rendered a good Indiana Jones likeness in response to a vague query asking for a 1930s archaeologist with a bullwhip. Was that particular response generated by ChatGPT because it "copied" Indiana Jones? Or because it was influenced by the same pulp fiction stories and deeply-embedded cultural archetypes that led Spielberg and Lucas to create the character in the first place?