this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
483 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

59329 readers
4477 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://nom.mom/post/121481

OpenAI could be fined up to $150,000 for each piece of infringing content.https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/08/report-potential-nyt-lawsuit-could-force-openai-to-wipe-chatgpt-and-start-over/#comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] And009@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They pay for it, simple.

Think about a code that an expert Samsung developer wrote and understanding and executing that flawlessly took 20 years of his/her experience. That person is the only one skilled enough to write it but an LLM model stole it and suggesting it every dev around the world.

That's a good thing if the dev gets paid to teach the model and then we pay to subscribe to it. Right now it's breaking the economy. Organisations and startups are abusing the knowledge and laying off skilled occupation.

[–] RedKrieg@lemmy.redkrieg.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nope, you're looking at it wrong. The Dev got paid to write that code and for all of their 20 years experience. The code was freely given away after that. Nobody loses when knowledge is shared, humanity wins. It gets hairy when you have businesses whose model relies on giving some content away for free and locking some behind a pay wall. Obviously using all of that to train a model without paying anything implies that they never had a subscription, but if they did have one and gave the model access? What's the difference between that and paying someone to read all those articles? What's the difference between training a model and paying an employee while training them to expertise? We're acting like these models are some kind of machine that chops up text and regurgitates it, but that could describe your average college freshman just as well. We're fast approaching the point where the distinction is meaningless. We can't treat model training any different from teaching a student.

[–] And009@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

It should be available for everyone to learn, agreed. But intellectual property and copyright still means something. Artists don't post anything online for others to steal. They want to share their work and humans look at those to learn and take inspiration.

Obviously I'm talking at a philosophical level and everyone is allowed to have their opinion on it, but I strongly believe that they should also have to follow etiquettes and only use open source and