News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source. Parent comment

Re:Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source by murki on Thursday July 27, 2023 @08:39PM (#36901951)
How are Modern Copyright laws helping authors, artists, and actors in those cases?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source by threeseed on Thursday July 27, 2023 @09:11PM (#36902085)
It's allowing them to sue OpenAI for copyright infringement:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/jul/05/authors-file-a...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source by ronsor on Thursday July 27, 2023 @09:41PM (#36902253)
* * *
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source by CamperBob2 on Thursday July 27, 2023 @09:54PM (#36902332)
Allowing them to block human intellectual progress may not be the long-term win you assume it is.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source by threeseed on Thursday July 27, 2023 @11:49PM (#36902955)
And some would argue that billion dollar companies like OpenAI, Meta etc should figure out a way to compensate the people who created the content they depend on.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source by CamperBob2 on Friday July 28, 2023 @12:09PM (#36909005)
Making the uncensored, unbiased, un-"aligned" results available to all for a fair price is compensation enough, I think. That's what we should be pushing for.

Whether demon or genie, any notion of putting this tech back in the bottle is a non-starter. As is turning it into a giant money grab for the copyright industry.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Llama and ChatGPT Are Not Open-Source by smoldesu on Thursday July 27, 2023 @11:58PM (#36902993)
That hasn't protected copywritten works in the past: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,....
[ Parent | on HN ]