←back to thread

451 points croes | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.663s | source
Show context
Workaccount2 ◴[] No.43963737[source]
I have yet to see someone explain in detail how transformer model training works (showing they understand the technical nitty gritty and the overall architecture of transformers) and also layout a case for why it is clearly a violation of copyright.

You can find lots of people talking about training, and you can find lots (way more) of people talking about AI training being a violation of copyright, but you can't find anyone talking about both.

Edit: Let me just clarify that I am talking about training, not inference (output).

replies(10): >>43963777 #>>43963792 #>>43963801 #>>43963816 #>>43963830 #>>43963874 #>>43963886 #>>43963955 #>>43964102 #>>43965360 #
1. autobodie ◴[] No.43963792[source]
I have yet to see someone explain in detail how writing the same words as another person works (showing they understand the technical nitty gritty and the overall architecture of the human mind) and also layout a case for why it is clearly a violation of copyright. You can find lots of people talking about reading, and you can find lots (way more) of people talking about plagarism being a violation of copyright, but you can't find anyone talking about both.
replies(1): >>43963965 #
2. xhkkffbf ◴[] No.43963965[source]
A big part of copyright law is protecting the market for the original creator. Not guaranteeing them anything. Just preventing someone else from coming along and copying someone else's work in a way that hurts their sales.

While AIs don't reproduce things verbatim like pirates, I can see how they really undermine the market, especially for non-fiction books. If people can get the facts without buying the original book, there's much less incentive for the original author to do the hard research and writing.