Authors using a new tool to search a list of 183,000 books used to train AI are furious to find their works on the list.

  • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, but the training data does contain a copy. And making a model is not criticising, commenting upon, or creating a parody of it.

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That list is not exclusive, it’s just a list of examples of fair use.

      The training data is not distributed with the AI model.

      • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        it’s just a list of examples of fair use.

        Yes, it’s a list of quite similar ways of commenting upon a work. Please explain how training an LLM is like any of those things, and thus, how Fair use would apply.

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not saying that training an LLM is like any of those things. I’m saying it doesn’t have to be like those things in order for it to still be fair use.

        • FontMasterFlex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not. The humans that trained it (assumably) purchased the material used to train it. What’s the problem?

          • BURN@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The use of the material to create a commercial product as well as the reality being that the humans training it never buy the data on an individual level.