Re:Tell HN: We Need Robots.txt but for AI
by tm-guimaraes on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @08:40AM
(#34324682)
The problem is copyright. Current AI landscapes are basically "copyright for me but not for you".
I would be fine if we just abolish copyright. I wish for a world with AttributionRight instead of copyright.
Re:Tell HN: We Need Robots.txt but for AI
by falcolas on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @08:52AM
(#34324809)
It’s a machine learning algorithm. It’s not learning like humans do, it’s not producing output like humans do.
It’s not human… Its not even GAI. It has no inherit rights, deserves no inherit rights.
Can we all please stop anthropomorphising a computer algorithm?
Re:Tell HN: We Need Robots.txt but for AI
by JustLurking2022 on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @08:56AM
(#34324855)
No, it's not learning like a human, it's fitting parameters to a function. AI will never conduct a science experiment to determine the veracity of the data it's indexing, or have an emotional reaction to it.
I bet it can do some experements if given a (thoughtful) request, resources/access. (I had ChatGPT control my Linux box through me, it gave commands and reasoning for it, I gave it the output... Another time I had it write an answer, give search terms to verify the claims, I gave the output, and it fixed the answer with actual citations.)
It can imitate reasoning and emotions better than some people I know at least.
Re:Tell HN: We Need Robots.txt but for AI
by burkaman on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @09:26AM
(#34325265)
Even if you think the model is learning in the exact same way a human does, you can't pretend it uses the information in the same way. A human, if it really wanted to, could study your style and imitate your blog posts maybe once a day, with varying levels of quality. An AI can do that a million times a day, perfectly, forever, basically for free. It's simply not a good comparison.
Nobody is concerned with AI learning from their content, they are concerned with how the AI will use their content, and there is no useful comparison between AI usage and human usage.
And I'm also not trying to bring people to any side, I'm not personally for or against AI learning on publicly available material, just providing a different perspective by veiling it in a slightly contrived example made with the position but "against" humans rather than AI.