OpenAI now tries to hide that ChatGPT was trained on copyrighted books, including J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series::A new research paper laid out ways in which AI developers should try and avoid showing LLMs have been trained on copyrighted material.

  • @Blapoo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    512 years ago

    We have to distinguish between LLMs

    • Trained on copyrighted material and
    • Outputting copyrighted material

    They are not one and the same

    • @TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      Should we distinguish it though? Why shouldn’t (and didn’t) artists have a say if their art is used to train LLMs? Just like publicly displayed art doesn’t provide a permission to copy it and use it in other unspecified purposes, it would be reasonable that the same would apply to AI training.

      • @Blapoo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Ah, but that’s the thing. Training isn’t copying. It’s pattern recognition. If you train a model “The dog says woof” and then ask a model “What does the dog say”, it’s not guaranteed to say “woof”.

        Similarly, just because a model was trained on Harry Potter, all that means is it has a good corpus of how the sentences in that book go.

        Thus the distinction. Can I train on a comment section discussing the book?

      • @TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        02 years ago

        I think this brings up broader questions about the currently quite extreme interpretation of copyright. Personally I don’t think its wrong to sample from or create derivative works from something that is accessible. If its not behind lock and key, its free to use. If you have a problem with that, then put it behind lock and key. No one is forcing you to share your art with the world.