OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Sam Altman are in massive trouble. OpenAI is getting sued in the US for illegally using content from the internet to train their LLM or large language models

  • cerevant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    So anyone who creates something remotely similar to something online is plagiarizing, got it.

    Folks, that’s how we all do things - we read stuff, we observe conversations, we look at art, we listen to music, and what we create is a synthesis of our experiences.

    Yes, it is possible for AI to plagiarize, but that needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis, just as it is for humans.

    • BURN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      AI is not human. It doesn’t learn like a human. It mathematically uses what it’s seen before to statistically find what comes next.

      AI isn’t learning, it’s just regurgitating the content it was fed in different ways

      • cerevant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        But is the output original? That’s the real question here. If humans are allowed to learn from information publicly available, why can’t AI?

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          No, it isn’t original. Output of AI is just reorganized content that it already has seen.

          AI doesn’t learn, it doesn’t create derivative works. It’s nothing more than reshuffling what it’s already seen, to the point that it will frequently use phrases pulled directly from training data.

          • cerevant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            You are saying that it isn’t original content because AI can’t be original. I’m saying if the content isn’t distinguishable from original content, and can’t be directly traced to the source, in what way is it not original?