- Meta open-sourced it my guy
- Nobody has responded to me with anything about how authors are harmed, so I don't really get who we're protecting here.
It feels more like we just want to punish people, particularly rich people, particularly if they get away with stuff we're afraid to try.
- Yes, but getting your hands on the material isn't a very interesting legal question IMO.
Whether you can train your LLM on it is a very interesting question.
I've personally never been in favor of punishing people for downloading (or seeding) things.
- > the point of copyright to begin with, which is to incentive people to create things
Is it?
(I don't agree)
- This really has fuck-all to do with copyright though, correct?
If you can't tell how the content is before you read it, it could be written by a monkey.
- I ran it, it came out to zero
- Would Aaron have preferred us to download the material and train the AI?
- Then why are we mad about the copyright stuff?
- And punishing them in the normal manner will be an incredibly small slap on the wrist, and do absolutely nothing to help us find out what will play out in court regarding a fair-use defense on training AI with copyrighted material.
- That's what I do, personally.
But you call it "stealing," others call it "copying."
Stealing takes, from someone, something they own.
- How do you suggest making them smaller?
For instance, what if google was still just serving search results w/ ads, and they never expanded that. How would you make them smaller?
- What are we actually worried about happening?
Are AI-written books getting published?
If they start out-competing humans, is that bad? According to most naysayers, they can't do anything original.
Are people asking the AI for books? And then hoping it will spit it out a human-written book word for word?
- It grants you the right to read & study it though.
- Speaking of GPT2, I remember that nobody gave a shit what it was trained on, because it sucked then.
- He left out part of the quote, which is misappropriated as well. Wikipedia:
> This quotation is often incorrectly attributed to Francis M. Wilhoit:
> Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
> However, it was actually a 2018 blog response by 59-year-old Ohio composer Frank Wilhoit, years after Francis Wilhoit's death.
- Like the ones they tested?
- 80-120wpm @ 100% accuracy (fixing mistakes)
Faster for normal texts, slower with punctuation/code/etc
- It's worse, but there's nowhere better than here imo.
Except very niche topics maybe
- He didn't even make a claim
Or, just to follow it through, let's say "WidgetBoss LLC" makes a new Widget that every single human has to have, they become the biggest company ever by making one widget. What will you do to make them smaller? Why?
I have a big problem with Google & Meta, and I can understand arguments about those companies. But not just "big companies" as a generality.
But that's how everyone speaks now. "Literally every billionaire is evil and exploiting blah blah blah"