this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
167 points (92.0% liked)

Technology

63186 readers
4806 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 other!
  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
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LexiconDexicon@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] seasonone@opidea.xyz 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Me Too. I don't understand why aren't publisher like Macmillan suing them?

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Do you think publishers want to pay human authors?

[–] Dusty@l.dusty-radio.com 12 points 2 years ago

Why is crap from 2 weeks ago being posted like it's new news yet again

Is this one of those bot accounts that aren't marked properly or is OP just after karma (which doesn't exist on this site).

[–] HonorIsDead@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm conflicted on a lot of this. At the end of the day it seems like these LLMs are simulating human behavior to an extent - exposure to content and generating similar content from that. Could Sarah Silverman be sued by comedians who influenced her comedy style and routines? generally no. I do understand the risk with letting these 'AI' run rampant to displace a huge portion of the creative space which is bad but where should the line be drawn? Is it only the fact they were trained material they dont own people are challenging? What recourse will they have when a LLM is trained on wholly owned IP?

[–] Granite@kbin.social 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

She’s suing for copyright infringement, basically, not the LLM emulating her style.

The LLMs read books from her and many, many others that they didn’t buy, because unauthorized copies had been uploaded to the web (happens to every popular book).

Honestly, I don’t know if she has a case. Going after the people who illegally uploaded her book would be the proper route, but that’s always nearly impossible.

Long and short, LLMs benefited from illegal copies.

[–] billstickers@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago

I see a lot of people claim the training model included copyrighted works particularly books because it can provide a summary of it. But it can provide a summary of visual media too, and no one is claiming it’s sitting there watching films.

If the argument is it has quite a detailed knowledge of the book, that’s not convincing either. All it needs is a summary and it can make up the blanks, and get it close enough we can’t tell the difference. Nothing is original.

[–] AngrilyEatingMuffins@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

none of the LLMs are funny or outrageous so I doubt she was highly cited.

it would be nice if the end result of all of these cases was that publicly sourced models had to be public services

ha! as if.

[–] chemical_cutthroat@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

I'm still waiting on proof for any of these allegations. So far it's just been people suing for the sake of suing and hoping they strike gold. If anyone can point to any evidence at all (read: not hearsay) then I'll gladly review it, but as it stands, its nothing.

[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago

I don't like Sarah Silverman.

load more comments
view more: next ›