Technology

57933 readers

4197 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

388

OpenAI claims The New York Times tricked ChatGPT into copying its articles (www.theverge.com)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

128 comments fedilink hide all child comments

OpenAI has publicly responded to a copyright lawsuit by The New York Times, calling the case “without merit” and saying it still hoped for a partnership with the media outlet.

In a blog post, OpenAI said the Times “is not telling the full story.” It took particular issue with claims that its ChatGPT AI tool reproduced Times stories verbatim, arguing that the Times had manipulated prompts to include regurgitated excerpts of articles. “Even when using such prompts, our models don’t typically behave the way The New York Times insinuates, which suggests they either instructed the model to regurgitate or cherry-picked their examples from many attempts,” OpenAI said.

OpenAI claims it’s attempted to reduce regurgitation from its large language models and that the Times refused to share examples of this reproduction before filing the lawsuit. It said the verbatim examples “appear to be from year-old articles that have proliferated on multiple third-party websites.” The company did admit that it took down a ChatGPT feature, called Browse, that unintentionally reproduced content.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Boozilla@lemmy.world 30 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Antiquated IP laws vs Silicon Valley Tech Bro AI...who will win?

I'm not trying to be too sarcastic, I honestly don't know. IP law in the US is very strong. Arguably too strong, in many cases.

But Libertarian Tech Bro megalomaniacs have a track record of not giving AF about regulations and getting away with all kinds of extralegal shenanigans. I think the tide is slowly turning against that, but I wouldn't count them out yet.

It will be interesting to see how this stuff plays out. Generally speaking, tech and progress tends to win these things over the long term. There was a time when the concept of building railroads across the western United States seemed logistically and financially absurd, for just one of thousands of such examples. And the nay sayers were right. It was completely absurd. Until mineral rights entered the equation.

However, it's equally remarkable a newspaper like the NYT is still around, too.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 19 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I've been critical of IP laws, but fundamentally believe that they need to exist in some form to encourage creativity. Look no further than the writer's guild strike for an example of individuals who wanted their bosses to steer clear of AI slop.

In fact, up until recently (when, coincidentally, their opinions started supporting giant AI corporations), critics of copyright were much more nuanced. But suddenly, a new strain of anti-copyright absolutists have arrived, lacking nuance and evidence for their beliefs. And if you question them too rigorously, they'll pretend they aren't absolutists.

[–] Gutless2615@ttrpg.network 0 points 8 months ago

Otoh copyright maximalists seem to be springing up everywhere

[–] sir_reginald@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

I've been advocating for anti-copyright since I discovered the works of the great Aaron Swartz.

I think that since AI corps are just effectively ignoring copyright, why not take the opportunity and just take copyright down for good?

I'm not too happy about AIs harvesting all the data they want, but since they are doing it anyway, just let anyone do it legally.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But Libertarian Tech Bro megalomaniacs have a track record of not giving AF about regulations and getting away with all kinds of extralegal shenanigans.

Not supporting them, but that's the whole point.

A lot of closed gardens get disrupted by tech. Is it for the better? Who knows. I for sure don't know. Because lots of rules were made by the wealthy, and technology broke that up. But then tech bros get wealthy and end up being the new elite, and we're back full circle.

[–] adrian783@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

seems like they're mostly for the worse, really.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Wikipedia destroyed the paper encyclopedia business.

Online courses disrupted higher education. Half of my team don't have a degree in computer science.

Say what you want about Airbnb/Uber, but the time before that was a shit show to be a black person trying to hail a taxi.

I'm sure you can name dozens of wtfs like Facebook, and misinformation. But I'm not so pessimistic because we got a lot of real great cultural shifts in the past twenty years.

[–] adrian783@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

neither wikipedia nor online education aimed to be disruptive. and the only good thing you can say about airbnb and uber are "it's easier for black ppl to get a taxi"