The AI community needs to take copyright lawsuits seriously.

Why The New York Times might win its copyright lawsuit against OpenAI::The AI community needs to take copyright lawsuits seriously.

    • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
      44·
      2 years ago

      While it got popularised as “Carmack’s reverse” the algorithm is actually significantly older.

      Also you’d have to show that it was literally copy+pasted, including comments and all, to even have a chance at a copyright claim: Algorithms are not subject to copyright, similar to how story structures aren’t. This is like saying “I asked an author to write a book and they plagiarised the hero’s arc!”. And even if it was copied straight-out you’d have an uphill battle to fight, to wit, wikipedia is quoting the thing verbatim.

      That said copilot seems to be severely over-fitted in places, and I don’t like the thing one single bit, and the only thing it’s generally good at is writing code faster that shouldn’t have been written in the first place, but inverse sqrt isn’t a good example.

        • tb_@lemmy.worldEnglish
          21·
          2 years ago

          I had bing chat spit back at me the question I posted on stack overflow the day before. You know, the example code I provided which didn’t exactly work as I wanted.

        • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
          21·
          2 years ago

          It didn’t produce the algorithm logically, it copied it.

          The magic number is part of the logic of the thing.

          But yes as said copilot is overfitted. Inverse sqrt still isn’t a good example, it’s nearly as bad as Oracle trying to claim to have found copyright infringement in Android’s standard Java library by saying that Math.average or whatnot is identical. There are way better examples of why copilot is fucked up.

      • tb_@lemmy.worldEnglish
        91·
        2 years ago

        “They aren’t getting away with plagiarism”

        - “There has been some plagiarism”

        “Some plagiarism doesn’t count!”

        • littleblue✨@lemmy.worldEnglish
          210·
          2 years ago

          Your lack of understanding the facts of the situation, much less the definition of plagiarism isn’t a strong argument.