skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> ‘There are legal tools and also rhetoric that are designed for dealing with this problem of "synthesising something that is identical to an existing thing", and it's different tools and rhetoric from the ones we have for dealing with the problem of "stealing or copying existing things".’

Copyright law applies in both cases. If you create work that’s substantially similar to an existing one, you’re risking copyright infringement even if none of the original work’s content was reproduced in the mechanical sense.

If this were not the case, why would cover bands pay the original artists for rights to the songs?

“I learned to play ‘Yesterday’ by heart” doesn’t mean you can do anything with the song without paying the Beatles. The same applies to machine learning, if all the model has learned is to imitate copyrighted works.
> he's not allowed to do anything about it, on pains of six months in prison.

He did indeed say (tweet) that [1] ...

> In every society, you need a balance of power.

Which in this case exists - there's a clear exception [2] that allows him to take action to prevent damage to his house.

See:

[1] https://twitter.com/mhudack/status/1650854942511448064

[2] https://twitter.com/TheAlanColeShow/status/16510204110253670...
Easy. People get to throw rocks at the shiny new thing.
To my untrained eye the entire idea of copyrighting a piece of text is ridiculous.
Let me phrase it in an entirely different way from how any other person seems to be approaching it.

If a medical procedure is proven to be life-saving, what happens worldwide? Doctors are forced to update their procedures and knowledge base to include the new information, and can get sued for doing something less efficient or more dangerous, by comparison.

If you write the most efficient code, and then simply slap a license on it, does that mean, the most efficient code is now unusable by those who do not wish to submit to your licensing requirements?

I hear an awful lot of people complain all the time about climate change and how bad computers are for the environment, there are even sections on AI model cards devoted to proving how much greenhouse gases have been pushed into the environment, yet none of those virtue signalling idiots are anywhere to be seen when you ask them why they aren't attacking the bureaucracy of copyright and law in the world of computer science.

An arbitrary example that is tangentially related:
One could argue that the company sitting on the largest database of self-driving data for public roads is also the one that must be held responsible if other companies require access to such data for safety reasons (aka, human lives would be endangered as a consequence of not having access to all relevant data). See how this same argument can easily be made for any license sitting on top of performance critical code?

So where are these people advocating for climate activism and whatever, when this issue of copyright comes up? Certainly if OpenAI was forced to open source their models, substantial computing resources would not have been wasted training competing open source products, thus killing the planet some more.

So, please forgive me if I find the entire field to be redundant and largely harmful for human life all over.
True, but I think it depends on the people involved. Some of us are ok with discarding a few months of hard work, and once even two years. Others are not.

I don’t know if this can be taught, but I can do it without rationalization. On the other hand, some of my previous coworkers left companies and had to enter therapy because of that.
Genera, TI and Xerox thought otherwise.

Unfortunely all of them messed up on management, and fighting against free UNIX source tapes.

"What you don’t use, you don’t pay for. And further: What you do use, you couldn’t hand code any better."
It's very simple. If it's open source and the license allows re-publishing code (with copyright information intact), people can republish the code. You don't get to discriminate, cherry-pick, etc. Depending on the license, there may be lots of rights and requirements. Especially with GPL style licenses. Especially AGPLv3 seems to impose a lot of restrictions. Which is a reason for that license to not be popular with corporations. But even that license allows republishing code as long as you preserve license and copyright information.

This generally is the whole point of open sourcing code: to allow others to republish with or without modifications. If you don't want that, don't open source your code. Github is a perfectly valid and legal place to publish code. Lots of people have done so.

The jury is still out on whether using open source code as training data is fair use or constitutes a copyright violation. But the safest assumption at this point is that it is a combination of fair use and hard to prove that any violation happened to begin with (i.e. good luck stamping your feet in anger in a court room).

Which will no doubt make for some fun court cases but will also take many many years to come to any kind of conclusion. I would recommend not to get your hopes up on that. Historically, copyright law has not been updated a lot to deal with any kind of technical change. And that's just inside the US. The world is bigger than that of course. A safe assumption is that judges will seek to interpret any new cases under centuries of existing interpretations. Because that's what they do. Any changes to the law would have to go through politicians. And then the interpretation of that relative to other laws is again up to judges. Which is why we have such wonderful things as DMCA and a few other attempts to close loopholes in copright law.

Of course time is not your friend here. By the time this rolls through the courts some years down the line, existing practice will have evolved to be hopelessly dependent on language models for just about anything. Including interpreting the law (e.g. chat gpt seems to be acing exams) and doing all sorts of complicated things in science, engineering and technology. So, any legal outcome that that is somehow illegal is going to be combination of unpopular, economically damaging, and therefore unlikely. Think big corporations ki
> with MySQL it's always going to be tough for larger queries

MySQL was too slow for running analytics on a single website? How much data are we talking about?
The business model for disruptive "innovation":

Weasel wording to evade legislation. It's not an unlicensed taxi, it's ride sharing. It's not an illegal hotel, it's couch surfing. It's not code licence infringement because it's learning.

It's lawyers finding loopholes for finance to avoid expenses that gives them an edge over the poor suckers who play by the rules. The tech is just a tool to this purpose.

And most people forget TANSTAAFL. The costs for the cars and their infrastructure, the load tourists put on a place, and the effort for writing the code are still there. The "innovators" just found a way to make somebody else pay for what should be their cost center.
> If it was possible to point to where the code is actually stored in Copilot (i.e. run strings on the server and it spits out the copylefted code), I would be a lot more sympathetic to the view that LLMs are stealing code

If it was possible to point where the pixel values are actually stored in a jpeg file (i.e. run dd on the file and it spits out the pixel values), I would be a lot more sympathetic to the view that LLMs are not stealing code.
Does this storage argument also go for humans? If I ask a painter to paint paintings they've seen before, what will be their rate of copying the painting exactly?
That works in a single person household. But once an extra person wants to use it then each person has to do the dance of re-pairing every morning - which can be painful if the other person's device was the last one that connected and is nearby.

Being able to have anyone just walk in the shower and say "device play music on Spotify" and have it just work is much simpler and requires much less thinking and effort - which is really nice first thing in the morning.

Also a speaker you can't connect after getting in the shower, but a smart speaker you can.
There are OpenGL extensions which can import a provided GPU buffer as a texture, using those you can achieve zero-copy.

For instance, with VAAPI->OpenGL you would use vaExportSurfaceHandle in conjunction with glEGLImageTargetTexture2DOES.

Check out the "hwdec" mechanism in MPV:

https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/blob/master/video/out/hwde...

https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/blob/master/video/out/hwde...
No, because I can ask it for a piece of code that isn't in the training set and it will write it for me.
The thing is - On chat GPT I don't need to worry about silly things such as "is my question actually a stupid one?", since it won't berate me for being a moron. I actually feel free there to explore things I don't know that well.

And for someone who asks and is curious about things, this is a godsend. I am using it as a learning tool, and some of its answers contained information that would take a long time for me to find myself, and it triggered me to look for actual tutorials and documentation that actually improved me as a developer.

You argue that SO makes answering worthwhile, but ChatGPT actually makes asking worthwhile.

And as a sidenote, I have expertise in a bunch of things, but I don't answer questions on SO, as I'm not interested in dealing with people interested in competing on it for internet points. I write tutorials on places like Medium or Hackernoon instead.
>Correct me if I'm wrong

You're wrong. It's literally the first sentence of the article.
Then can you please enlighten me which are those automotive companies that pay six figure salaries for ICs (not managers)?

The whole "industry pay isn't low, I know someone who's a millionaire, you're underpaid" alone doesn't really help anyone without any hard facts.
Yeah, I bought a Pocophone F1 when it came out, expecting to instantly install LineageOS, but then I found out that I have to wait a full week and set up a Windows VM.

The phone per-se wasn't bad, but that was my last purchase from Xiaomi.

Replaced the Pocophone with a Google Pixel 5A and I will stick to Google Pixel because GrapheneOS is great.
Taking vacation with burnout was worse for me, because I basically wasted perfectly good vacation time and came back to work feeling exactly the same, perhaps a bit worse.
It doesn’t matter. The process is irrelevant.

Black box. Input. Output. Is the output the same as some training input?

It’s not rocket science.

“…but humans…” argument is not relevant. This is not a human.
Here is a kind of reference to the matter,

"What you don’t use, you don’t pay for. And further: What you do use, you couldn’t hand code any better."

https://boats.gitlab.io/blog/post/zero-cost-abstractions/
It's not that easy in the global world.

The owner of TikTok is ByteDance, an American company. Would you ban them?

Also, Apple produces in China, under the jurisdiction of the CCP. Would you also ban them?

Those two examples are obvious, but when you look at the typical international megacorp structure, it becomes quickly much more difficult.
And that's a fine position as long as those parents take responsibility for ensuring their children don't have access to things they don't want them to have access to. It's not fine if it means they want the state to restrict access for everyone.
But if I put a human in the black box, that somehow now matters to your argument, because you're saying that it only holds for machines.
What are those not so good books?
Related to this, why is there a disc in the SD card logo? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeLvdE8lNW4
This was excellent reading (if sobering). Naomi Klein is articulate and hard-hitting in equal measure. The idea that bots aren't wrong but "hallucinating" is tech spin taken to a whole new level of delusional absurdity.
Location data, Wi-Fi (B)SSIDs passwords, information about other devices in your LAN.

The Wi-Fi BSSID alone is enough to pinpoint someone's exact location.
Trying to be more precise:

If the LLM reproduces a significant portion of a program token-by-token, is it a derivative work and is it not fair use?
Didn't emacs add actual support for OS threads recentishly?
Can I start a waterfall every two weeks?
This is common to most countries, not particular of England. If you find an archeological object it is part of the country patrimony. It is particularly interesting when you are working in a construction and the building is completely halted because it is in a new discovered archeological area.

The spirit of this kind of laws is not only to protect the patrimony but to keep the objects within the boundaries of the country. Without these laws the objects will fly to the best buyer in the globe.
Self hosted GitBlit.

https://www.gitblit.com/
Your post is a good example on how even highly educated people need more education, how communication is an important thing in science and how framing changes perception of everything.

Anti-aging science is basically the most audacious preventative program out there. It is not really about "immortality" (even if this level of success were to be reached, one can always kill themselves, no biology will give you immunity to fast flying bullets), but an attempt to prevent or at least delay onset of a host of chronic diseases that are synonymous with aging.

"but the problem is that it gets rolled up with immortality"

Then don't contribute to that problem by insinuating that anti-aging is something different from healthcare. It is not, it is literally about extending healthspan, at least at this point. Rejuvenation means making people live longer by improving their metabolism etc.; how it is not healthcare in the best sense of the word (protecting health instead of treating already extant diseases)?

"Everything dies, or breaks down, or decays."

And yet you can keep your room tidy for long decades even if the entropy of the universe as such increases.

We have a lot of self-repair mechanisms, that is why we live longer than our relatives like dogs and mice. "The universe" does not dictate to us whether to get cancer or not; some species (like whales) seem to be very resistant to cancer and it is absolutely thinkable that we could acquire this ability too, if we happen to learn enough about metabolism. Etc. etc.

Human death at 80 isn't a result of laws of physics, any more than murine death at 2,5. It is a case of biological dysregulation that can possibly be fixed or at least improved, much like we improved other things about ourselves. Few of the HN crowd would proclaim wearing glasses to fix your vision to be unnatural. What we are looking for in anti-aging are "glasses for the body".
That’s an option for a consumer who knows what a VLAN is, but mass-market appliances need to have some barrier to network access.
Why is this treasure reporting law "especially draconian"?

Here's the law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_Act_1996

I'm not British but even I've heard about the law by watching Time Team on YouTube.

Just because you think X is bad doesn't make Y bad.

In the US the government can prevent you from killing a protected species, picking up the feathers of a protected species, digging up a graveyard without permission, desecrating burial goods on your land, and more.

US state laws regarding treasure troves may require reporting as well, says https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove#State_laws , and different states have different conclusions about who gets to keep the treasure.

I don't see how this British law stands out in any way as being unbalanced or especially draconian.
Can't help thinking it would be better to use an array rather than a list.
that is interesting! can you describe how that transcription process works? if i have an audiobook and the corresponding ebook/pdf, isn't that already transcribed? or does transcription here mean something else?

i'd also be happy to use an existing voice (the english one from keith ito sounds pleasant enough) but i am confused how to use it to read a book. there is code for a model that learns to synthesize speech from the data: https://github.com/keithito/tacotron
but i don't see how to get at the end result which i think would hopefully also be available somewhere so i can just use it to read something.
> AI instead has looked at all the existing code and it has learnt to do no more than what the existing code can do.

Are you sure about that?
Thank you.

It seems that most of the takes against this article are coming from people that have opinions about AWS based on nothing.

Sure, AWS is selling Lambda/Serverless services. Sure, they are making articles/videos on microservices architecture.
But they are also selling EC2 instances. They are also making articles/videos on monolithic architecture.

I have never come across any content from AWS telling that this service/architecture/mindset is the best and every company should use/implement it.

Anyone who went through the Well-Architected Framework would be completely aware of that.

But I guess it's easier to mock some folks over the Internet than taking time to grab some knowledge and reflect.
I think they said they switched to Unreal Engine 5 for "The Witcher 4".
I'm trying it a bit and it looks pretty good. A bit worse at re-using context but promising. Why does kagi gives that away for free, but asks a fee for search ? I would argue chat is more expansive operationnally ?
That is actually better, but you have to be a pervert. Source: wrote some fully featured applications using own bash framework.
Easy-to-use, high-performance, open source distributed transaction solution
They could just train a model on GPL code that can only be used on GPL code.

For MIT licenses that's impossible currently because of the requirement to mention the authors.
Funnily, the copyright argument is shifting towards “if resemblance is substantial, that’s infringing anyway”, circumventing whole discussions around “is it infringing if it’s called learning” arguments.
Nah, hardware people just don't negotiate hard enough.

Add a one-byte option into the header, give it an unassigned value (e.g. 6) and assume that any box that does not understand it will pass it through unchanged. Use it as the most significant byte of the address, and obsolete all routing equipment that doesn't understand it from the backbone so that they can be used to handle routing in one of the new 32-bit super-A class networks.

Sure it's ugly as hell, but it is just backward compatible enough to work.
Yours may be, but that isn't true for the majority (dare I say >95%) of users. The problem is that people tend to simplify when forced to remember things, or re-use. A Passkey, even handled in the manner described in this post, is better for most people.
There have been quite a few cases of the neural nets spitting out the code they've been trained on verbatim, including comments IIRC. They're not just "learning" (if they're "learning" at all).
Hasn't that all been excessively played through in music copyright questions? With the difference that the parody exception that protects e.g. the entire The Rutles catalogue won't get you far in code...
For comparison:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove#United_States
they are in ChatGPT most likely. The question is why those and all the other inputs are not really accessible (by a subscription for example) for the general public...
He might have finally spotted Ibycus‘ cranes.
> Especially if nobody can actually quantitatively measure the loss of efficiency.

Yet ironically they care and tout about their ability to measuring efficiency.

An easy way to boost efficiency: hide inefficiency out from view!
How much of that topology is speculation? I get that geologists can estimate the latitude of a location at a given time because of climate and chemical signals, plus some contemporary tectonic shift vectors. I don't get how paleomagnetism is reliable when the magnetic field can wander in the timespan of some thousand years. I'd expect the resulting equations to yield a multitude of solutions or even be unsolvable.
> which could be the john's house, or a random motel

Then maybe change it so they can have a safe and legal place of business.
One way to run out of cash is to hire 50 expensive devs to build a microservices hairball with Kafkas and all the latest toys, as opposed to having 5 devs just knock it out, faster and better, with a single Python app and a Postgres database.

We used to build real-scale systems with a stack of this kind when we had fewer features and less CPU power.
Apple makes some great hardware and software.

But here are things I think they drag their feet on:

1. iPhone on Lightning. USB-C is everywhere now, the only charging port on every MacBook for years, and on iPad Pro.

2. macOS not on iPad Pro. M2 processor is pointless, but they price the iPad Pro as though the M2 would benefit you... somehow.

3. you pretty much have to jailbreak iOS and iPadOS to compile real code (not Playgrounds), or to do your own things on hardware that you... own.

For each of the above there are obvious monetary reasons not to make progress.

1. MFI lock in, licensing fees.

2. if iPad Pro could run macOS, there would (rightfully) be a lot of "lost" MacBook Air sales

3. if people could write real code on an iPad (or use "real" tools like XCode or Visual Studio Code, or just about ANY IDE), lot of "lost" Mac sales

I would like to think that if Apple reversed course on their foot-dragging, they would actually gain a much wider market share, making up for any lost sales. Also, people would not think twice when a new iPad with M3 would be announced. As for myself (and I suspect a growing number of tech people), I refuse to spend one red cent, precisely because I refuse to reward this kind of behaviour.
the human painter will undoubtedly be able to put out 1 billion exact copies of paintings based on their memory and skills in under 10 seconds so there is no reason to consider any difference in the cases.
It seems like polluting more on purpose not avoiding polluting.
But not every author will have agreed to the EULA, if the project includes code by people not in GitHub. E.g. if there is a GitHub mirror of a project that is not hosted by the author, if a project received a patch via email instead of a PR, etc.
The problem for Datalog adoption is there are dozens of incompatible Datalog engines. And most (all?) are not good or well maintained. It's sad.
If you transcribe a copyrighted book by hand, that doesn't give you the right to publish it. I don't think being a human currently gives you a legal loophole to copy works so why make the comparison?
Birds are a great way to measure changes in ecosystems. They are, relatively, easy to spot and there are few enough species that it’s possible for a lot of nerds to know all of the local ones well enough to do routine informal surveys.

People have been noticing changes in bird distributions for a long time. Cattle Egrets have spread with agricultural development and are now common in Australia, a continent they were previously not found on.

Things moving north with climate change is just the next step really.
Is number of copies and speed of making them a significant determinant in whether copyright infringement took place or not?
I don’t care if there’s a human in the box. If the box spits out training input as output it is copying it.

It doesn’t matter if there is a human doing it or not.

For your supposition to work, the input to the box would be only an abstract summary of the logical steps, and the output an exact copy of some other thing that was never an input.

In that case, yes, it would not be copying.

..but, is that the case? Hm? Is that what we care about? Is it possible to randomly generate the exact sequence of text with no matching training input? Along with the comments?

It seems fabulously unlikely, the point of being totally absurd.