I’m wondering how this can actually hurt OpenAI. How is this any different than a person purchasing and reading a book and proliferating by using that information? The information is consumed and interpretation is being used not the direct regurgitation of information.
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
11 points (86.7% liked)
ChatGPT
1479 readers
4 users here now
A community to discuss about ChatGPT and AI. Not affiliated with OpenAI.
Rules:
-
NSFW must be marked as such
-
No porn
-
Don't be toxic
-
jailbreaks are allowed for now at least
-
No trashposts.
-
Keep the memes to a minimum
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I guess that's one of the core questions the courts have to answer now. I guess it has a lot to do with automation and precision.
For example, there are libraries where you are free to read certain books cover to cover, but not allowed to copy them and take either home.
Not a perfect analogy but I hope you get the idea. Another case could be made if literal paragraphs appear, without citing the author.
Yeah those libraries provide differently depending on the person consuming them. I’d go as far as to say punishing people with a learning disability or social anxiety. I can’t see a reasoning behind keeping people from taking them home.
Reading this all I can think of is Number 5 reading books and saying more input Stefanie!!!!