Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 845 posts

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#621

Post by noosphr »

nomilk wrote: post #592

Wonder how much the addition of copyrighted material affects how smart the resulting model is. If it's even 20% better LLM makers could be forced out of the US into jurisdictions that allow use of copyrighted data. I suspect most LLM users will ~always choose the smartest model.

The jump from llama2 to llama3 had something to do with meta downloading every textbook ever published and using it as training data.

The arguments by meta so far in that court case are absolutely terrible and I'm half expecting to see the world's first trillion dollar copyright infringement award.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#622

Post by thedevilslawyer »

antonkar wrote: post #613

Basically stole almost whole output of humanity both dead and alive, put it in their Frankenstein Monsters’ ever growing brains and now want to let em roam unsupervised longer and longer (AI agents) and continue to steal things. Taking away human freedoms and giving em to agents 101

What stealing? None of the original content is gone. Perhaps "infringement" is a more apt word.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#623

Post by srg0 »

Copyrighted material includes works by authors from outside the US. By Berne convention, the exceptions which any country may introduce must not "conflict with a normal exploitation of the work" and "unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author". So if at least one French author does license their work for AI training, then any exception of this kind will harm their legitimate interests and rob them of potential income from normal exploitation of the work.

If the US can harm authors from other countries, then other countries may be willing to reciprocate to American copyright holders, and introduce exceptions which allow free use of the US copyrighted material for some specific purposes they deem important.

IANAL, but it is a slippery slope, and it may hurt everyone. Who has more to lose?

And I hope that Mistral.AI takes note.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#624

Post by shakna »

darkwater wrote: post #598
Animats wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's in progress. It's called the MAGA Parallel Economy.[1] Donald Trump, Jr. is in charge. Vivek Ramaswamy and Peter Thiel are involved. Azoria ETF and 1789 Capital are funds designed to fund MAGA-friendly companies. But this may be a sideshow. The main show is US CEOs sucking up to Trump, as happened at the inauguration. That parallels something Putin did in 2020. Putin called in the top two dozen oligarchs, and…

> That parallels something Putin did in 2020. Putin called in the top two dozen oligarchs, and told them "Stay out of politics and your wealth won’t be touched. > Khodorkovsky [...] was arrested in 2003 Something doesn't square here

It was in 2000 [0]

[0] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2022/03/29/1088886554/how...

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#625

Post by actionfromafar »

echelon wrote: post #599
austin-cheney wrote: post #584

A slippery slope to eliminate copyright out right. The argument made is that AI is somehow more special and will otherwise lose to competition with China. The flaw there is that AI is not more special than any other endeavor while all other American markets must equally compete with China. What that failure means is that when anything is exceptional then everything becomes exceptional because the economic conditions…

OpenAI has no moat. They're afraid of open source and want the government to protect them. Microsoft doesn't think they're very cool anymore. Sam Altman is going to have one of the quickest falls from grace in tech history. It's a shame he's using his time to try to legislate a worse world for the rest of us.

At the rate things are going in the US, "legislate" seems to be largely replaced by "executive directive", so maybe you don't have to worry about legislation. (We will still have the worse world part, of course.)

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#626

Post by thedevilslawyer »

austin-cheney wrote: post #617
faragon wrote: post #587

If a person can read copyrighted material and produce derivative works, why not an AI?

Copyright does not restrict consumption. It only restricts reproduction. To restrict consumption you need a patent.

Good then that LLMs don't reproduce content.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#627

Post by actionfromafar »

deepsummer wrote: post #619

I think an AI should be treated like a human. A human can consume copyright material (possibly after paying for it), but not reproduce it. I don't see any reason why the same can't be true for an AI.

Then, we should also put the AI in jail when it's breaking copyright laws. Or being an accessory to breaking copyright law.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#628

Post by thedevilslawyer »

piracymadelegal wrote: post #596
faragon wrote: post #587

If a person can read copyrighted material and produce derivative works, why not an AI?

Sure, so, can I make and sell my own Lilo and Stitch movie now? It'll be even better than the one about to release, and all that means is I'll deviate even less.

This was settled prior to LLMs - you can't do that because the characters names are copyrighted. LLMs change nothing here.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#630

Post by hansmayer »

jemmyw wrote: post #607
hansmayer wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because - well a person can read copyrighted material it legally obtained the rights to, for example by purchasing a hard or electronic copy of the book or magazine. Alternatively, and according to the laws worldwide, if a person were to engage in massive theft for the purpose of "reading" all available copyrighted materials in the world, by obtaining copyrighted material without permission and consent of the copyrig…

I don't think there is actually a law anywhere that says you need to obtain the rights to copyright material to read/view them. The person or organisation showing it to you, which might be yourself, needs to have a license. Otherwise things like libraries couldn't exist and you wouldn't be allowed to lend books or even have books in your house that other family members can read. Not saying that particularly impacts y…

I mean, look at it this way. Let's say you purchase a Woody Allen film on DVD. Will anyone seriously prosecute you for watching it at home together with your friends? No, that falls within normal usage. But let's say you now organise a local watching event with the same DVD for 200 people in a hall somewhere, and charge everyone, whatever, $6 - just to cover the hall expenses. Will you be prosecuted? Very likely. Libraries are probably under some sort of "fair use" regulation due to public interest and such. They don't quite generate profit with their line of work - nor should they!
Post reply on HN