439

Authors using a new tool to search a list of 183,000 books used to train AI are furious to find their works on the list.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] adriaan@sh.itjust.works 38 points 11 months ago

That would be a much better comparison if it was artificial intelligence, but these are just reinforcement learning models. They do not get inspired.

[-] Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

More to the point: they replicate patterns of words.

[-] lloram239@feddit.de 8 points 11 months ago
[-] FontMasterFlex@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

That's a Bingo!

[-] Shurimal@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago

just reinforcement learning models

...like the naturally occuring neural networks are.

[-] Khalic@kbin.social 32 points 11 months ago

The brain does not work the way you think… (I work in the field, bio-informatics). What you call “neural networks” come from an early misunderstanding of how the brain stores information. It’s a LOT more complicated and frankly, barely understood.

[-] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

Yeah, accurately simulating a single pyramidal neuron requires an eight-layer deep neural network:

https://www.cell.com/neuron/pdf/S0896-6273(21)00501-8.pdf

[-] demonsword@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

that was an interesting read, thank you

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

It’s a LOT more complicated and frankly, barely understood.

Yet you confidently state that the brain doesn't work the way LLMs do?

Obviously it doesn't work exactly the same way that LLMs do, if only because of the completely different substrates. But when you get to more nebulous concepts like "creativity" and "inspiration" it's not so clear.

[-] lloram239@feddit.de 5 points 11 months ago

The part where brain and neural net differ is in the learning via backpropagation, that seem to be done different in the brain, as there is no mechanism to go backwards through the network and jiggle the weights.

That aside, they seem to work very similar once they are trained, as the knowledge they are able to extract from data ends up being basically the same that a human would be able to extract. There is surprisingly little weirdness in AI and a surprising amount of human-like capabilities.

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 11 months ago

people have a definite fear of being defined as machines... not sure why we think were so special..

[-] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 10 points 11 months ago

Tell you what, you get a landmark legal decision classifying LLM as people and then we'll talk.

Until then it's software being fed content in a way not permitted by its license i.e. the makers of that software committing copyright infringement.

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

What exactly was not permitted by the license? Reading?

[-] sab@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

Using it to (create a tool to) create derivatives of the work on a massive scale.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

An AI model is not a derivative work. It does not contain the copyrighted expression, just information about the copyrighted expression.

[-] SirGolan@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 11 months ago

Wikipedia: In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyrightable elements of a first, previously created original work.

I think you may be off a bit on what a derivative work is. I don't see LLMs spouting out major copyrightable elements of books. They can give a summary sure, but Cliff Notes would like to have a word if you think that's copyright infringement.

[-] lloram239@feddit.de 5 points 11 months ago

Better tell that Google and their search index, book scanning project and knowledge graph.

[-] sab@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I didn't know those were LLMs, TIL.

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world -3 points 11 months ago

Well when that happens we have laws. So no problems

[-] sab@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Would you be okay with applying that argument for any crime?

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

I would be, and I don't understand why you think this would be a problem. I wouldn't want the government to be preventing activities that there weren't any actual laws prohibiting.

[-] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Ever heard of the early 21st century classic Minority Report

[-] sab@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

You're missing the point. I'll make your example more specific.

Well when fraud/rape/murder happens we have laws. So no problems.

Those things happen. Creating a LLM based on copyrighted material without permission happens - it's not a hypothetical. But even then, giving a punishment after the fact does not make the initial crime "no problem", as you put it.

this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
439 points (93.6% liked)

Technology

58150 readers
3872 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