Some argue that bots should be entitled to ingest any content they see, because people can.

Avram Piltch is the editor in chief of Tom’s Hardware, and he’s written a thoroughly researched article breaking down the promises and failures of LLM AIs.

  • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
    1·
    1 year ago

    If they’ve seen prior art, yes, they are. It’s literally not possible to be exposed to the history of art and not have everything you output be derivative in some manner.

    Processing and learning from copyrighted material is not restricted by current copyright law in any way. It cannot be infringement, and shouldn’t be able to be infringement.

    • RickRussell_CA@beehaw.orgOPEnglish
      3·
      1 year ago

      It’s literally not possible to be exposed to the history of art and not have everything you output be derivative in some manner.

      I respectfully disagree. You may learn methods from prior art, but there are plenty of ways to insure that content is generated only from new information. If you mean to argue that a rendering of landscape that a human is actually looking at is meaningfully derivative of someone else’s art, then I think you need to make a more compelling argument than “it just is”.