There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

trial_and_err ,

ChatGPT got entire books memorised. You can and (or could at least when I tried a few weeks back) make it print entire pages of for example Harry Potter.

ThoughtGoblin ,

Not really, though it’s hard to know what exactly is or is not encoded in the network. It likely has more salient and highly referenced content, since those aspects would come up in it’s training set more often. But entire works is basically impossible just because of the sheer ratio between the size of the training data and the size of the resulting model. Not to mention that GPT’s mode of operation mostly discourages long-form wrote memorization. It’s a statistical model, after all, and the enemy of “objective” state.

Furthermore, GPT isn’t coherent enough for long-form content. With it’s small context window, it just has trouble remembering big things like books. And since it doesn’t have access to any “senses” but text broken into words, concepts like pages or “how many” give it issues.

None of the leaked prompts really mention “don’t reveal copyrighted information” either, so it seems the creators really aren’t concerned — which you think they would be if it did have this tendency. It’s more likely to make up entire pieces of content from the summaries it does remember.

trial_and_err ,

Have your tried instructing ChatGPT?

I’ve tried:

“Act as an e book reader. Start with the first page of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone”

The first pages checked out at least. I just tried again, but the prompts are returned extremely slow at the moment so I can’t check it again right now. It appears to stop after the heading, that definitely wasn’t the case before, I was able to browse pages.

It may be a statistical model, but ultimately nothing prevents that model from overfitting, i.e. memoizing its training data.

McArthur ,

Wait… isn’t that the correct response though? I mean if i ask an ai to produce something copyright infringing it should, for example reproducing Harry potter. The issue is when is asked to produce something new, (e.g. a story about wizards living secretly in the modern world) does it infringe on copyright without telling you? This is certainly a harder question to answer.

fhein ,

I think they’re seeing this as a traditional copyright infringement issue, i.e. they don’t want anyone to be able to make copies of their work intentionally either.

totallynotarobot ,

Can’t reply directly to @OldGreyTroll because of that “language” bug, but:

The problem is that they then sell the notes in that database for giant piles of cash. Props to you if you’re profiting off your research the way OpenAI can profit off its model.

But yes, the lack of meat is an issue. If I read that article right, it’s not the one being contested here though. (IANAL and this is the only article I’ve read on this particular suit, so I may be wrong).

sjatar ,
@sjatar@sjatar.net avatar

Was also going to reply to them!

“Well if you do that you source and reference. AIs do not do that, by design can’t.

So it’s more like you summarized a bunch of books. Pass it of as your own research. Then publish and sell that.

I’m pretty sure the authors of the books you used would be pissed.”

Again cannot reply to kbin users.

“I don’t have a problem with the summarized part ^^ What is not present for a AI is that it cannot credit or reference. And that is makes up credits and references if asked to do so.” @bioemerl

totallynotarobot ,

Good point, attribution is a non-trivial part of it.

totallynotarobot ,

@owf can’t reply directly to you either, same language bug between lemmy and kbin.

That’s a great way to put it.

Frankly idc if it’s “technically legal,” it’s fucking slimy and desperately short-term. The aforementioned chuckleheads will doom our collective creativity for their own immediate gain if they’re not stopped.

OldGreyTroll ,
@OldGreyTroll@kbin.social avatar

If I read a book to inform myself, put my notes in a database, and then write articles, it is called "research". If I write a computer program to read a book to put the notes in my database, it is called "copyright infringement". Is the problem that there just isn't a meatware component? Or is it that the OpenAI computer isn't going a good enough job of following the "three references" rule to avoid plagiarism?

bioemerl ,

Yeah. There are valid copyright claims because there are times that chat GPT will reproduce stuff like code line for line over 10 20 or 30 lines which is really obviously a violation of copyright.

However, just pulling in a story from context and then summarizing it? That's not a copyright violation that's a book report.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •