Gregory's Server... Is it stealing the answers off Stack Overflow any more than people do by using the answers?
|
34 comments
 The planet was already on a course for death before we figured out how to make useful brain analogues on silicon hardware. Also, if and when we shift completely to carbon neutral power, the amount of electricity that AI consumes (which will only go down as processing becomes increasingly more power efficient) won't matter @atatassault @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben @intransitivelie @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben I'd say being able to predict protein folding is pretty fucking useful. @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben This isn't an LLM using data without attribution lol @bananarama @intransitivelie @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben Deep Learning, Machine Learning, LLM, etc all mean the same thing: Neural Network AI @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben Additionally, each of those terms have distinct technical meanings. They're not the same.  @bananarama And neither of these techniques has a mode that provides attribution. It's an open research question that some but not many are discussing. @atatassault @bananarama @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben  @intransitivelie @atatassault @bananarama@mstdn.social @jlsigman @ben@m.benui.ca your denial is not factually correct. You've not provided any valid argument. Your denial without any reliable claims can be safely ignored.  @atatassault @bananarama @intransitivelie @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben > "Deep Learning, Machine Learning, LLM, etc all mean the same thing: Neural Network AI" Chatgpt, is that you? @bananarama @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @ben that is transformative which is in the agreement @martin_piper @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @ben Oops, still requires attribution. Try again. EDIT: Also notice, it is share-alike. @bananarama @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @ben and how do you know there won't be attribution? You're just assuming that. @martin_piper @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @ben I can't prove a negative, try again. To anyone reading this after the fact: the evidence is that LLMs are notoriously bad for hallucinating attribution. There would need to be some pretty major changes to get attribution to work accurately and reliably, and this doesn't even cover the share-alike licensing issues. @bananarama @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @ben you're the one claiming there isn't attribution...  @martin_piper @bananarama @atatassault @intransitivelie @jlsigman @ben The number of commercial LLMs or generative AIs in general that do attribution of their sources as licenced is currently 0. The entire industry have been able to get away with it for now several years. Do you expect stackexchange to be radically different in a positive way and not communicate about it? @atatassault It's useful, but it's a stretch to call it a brain analogue. AI that is useful, usually is useful because it is different from how our brains work, even if the algorithm fell out of an AI lab while thinking about brains. @atatassault @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben itβs different, therefore litigatable as copyright infringement. @InkomTech @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben You'd need to sue basically every single corporation ever that does its own coding, as I GUARANTEE you that they all have code an engineer got from Stack Overflow. @atatassault @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben youβre missing the βthis is an unauthorized use of material I wrote and therefore retain copyright ofβ. Folks reading SO != AI training, just like theaters and dvds!= streaming revenue. @InkomTech @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben People reading and using code from SO by mouse and keyboard is not conceptually or mechanically different than using a computer to automatically do it. @atatassault @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben I could agree with you, but then weβd both be wrong. Again, a clickthru license isnβt remotely strong enough to strip someone of their ownership. Copyright is a motherfucker. Over and over, creatives have clawed back IP and forced a renegotiation due to new media, new venues, new uses. @InkomTech @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben So you gonna be the one to sue every single corporation? Because they all use SO code. Because people are lazy. @atatassault @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben SMH. read what I wrote again. Peer forum use is a different use. While that would likely survive as released by acceptance of the TOS, new uses of copyright (AI training) likely wonβt. @atatassault @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben odds seem high that you donβt understand copyright. Good luck coming up to speed on it; my responses arenβt for you, but so anyone understanding copyright law can evaluate / discuss the risks in investing in this AI land grab and of SOβs move. Good luck. @InkomTech @atatassault @jlsigman @ben I understand it better than you obviously don't. You don't own your public posts on such a website, the company does. @InkomTech @atatassault @jlsigman @ben it's not a click through license when you have an account. It does does mean they own the technical content of the posts and can do what they like with it. @InkomTech @atatassault @jlsigman @ben your denial is not factually correct. @atatassault @jlsigman @martin_piper @ben let me amend: the strongest way a creative person can lose copyright: work for hire. I ainβt never gotten paid by SO. What I write remains mine. |
@atatassault @martin_piper @ben Yup! AI is theft at this point. Expensive, world killing, water sucking theft. Enjoy your dead planet!