this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
694 points (95.4% liked)

Technology

59647 readers
2609 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
 

OpenAI now tries to hide that ChatGPT was trained on copyrighted books, including J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series::A new research paper laid out ways in which AI developers should try and avoid showing LLMs have been trained on copyrighted material.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sentau@lemmy.one 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (25 children)

I think a lot of people are not getting it. AI/LLMs can train on whatever they want but when then these LLMs are used for commercial reasons to make money, an argument can be made that the copyrighted material has been used in a money making endeavour. Similar to how using copyrighted clips in a monetized video can make you get a strike against your channel but if the video is not monetized, the chances of YouTube taking action against you is lower.

Edit - If this was an open source model available for use by the general public at no cost, I would be far less bothered by claims of copyright infringement by the model

[–] Tyler_Zoro@ttrpg.network 25 points 1 year ago (15 children)

AI/LLMs can train on whatever they want but when then these LLMs are used for commercial reasons to make money, an argument can be made that the copyrighted material has been used in a money making endeavour.

And does this apply equally to all artists who have seen any of my work? Can I start charging all artists born after 1990, for training their neural networks on my work?

Learning is not and has never been considered a financial transaction.

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Ehh, "learning" is doing a lot of lifting. These models "learn" in a way that is foreign to most artists. And that's ignoring the fact the humans are not capital. When we learn we aren't building a form a capital; when models learn they are only building a form of capital.

[–] Tyler_Zoro@ttrpg.network 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Artists, construction workers, administrative clerks, police and video game developers all develop their neural networks in the same way, a method simulated by ANNs.

This is not, "foreign to most artists," it's just that most artists have no idea what the mechanism of learning is.

The method by which you provide input to the network for training isn't the same thing as learning.

[–] Sentau@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Artists, construction workers, administrative clerks, police and video game developers all develop their neural networks in the same way, a method simulated by ANNs.

Do we know enough about how our brain functions and how neural networks functions to make this statement?

[–] Yendor@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do we know enough about how our brain functions and how neural networks functions to make this statement?

Yes, we do. Take a university level course on ML if you want the long answer.

[–] Sentau@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

My friends who took computer science told me that we don't totally understand how machine learning algorithms work. Though this conversation was a few years ago in college. Will have to ask them again

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

ANNs are not the same as synapses, analogous yes, but different mathematically even when simulated.

[–] Prager_U@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

This is orthogonal to the topic at hand. How does the chemistry of biological synapses alone result in a different type of learned model that therefore requires different types of legal treatment?

The overarching (and relevant) similarity between biological and artificial nets is the concept of connectionist distributed representations, and the projection of data onto lower dimensional manifolds. Whether the network achieves its final connectome through backpropagation or a more biologically plausible method is beside the point.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)