Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Michael K Johnson (mcdanlj@social.makerforums.info)'s status on Friday, 23-Feb-2024 08:46:03 JST Michael K Johnson

   • Cults.

   I was looking at my parametric einstein / spectre tiles and noticed that @cults3d appears to have defaulted to a no-ai license on everything, since I don't recall setting it and I see it there.

   I think that makes sense as a default global setting.

   I'm also now faced with a conundrum: I licensed that work CC0 inasmuch as copyright even could apply to it, which isn't clear to me. To me, CC0 implies not restricting AI training.

   I think that calling LLMs generalized AIs is bogus, and as much hype as OpenAI has built on the pretense, when things went bad they were happy to say "well ackshually it's just random probabilities," I've also known for a long time that using statistics to find hidden patterns is pretty much what the entire field of statistics is for, and ML and LLMs are fundamentally interesting and sometimes unreasonably effective applications of statistics.

   So I think I really should not try to restrict training any form of statistical inference on CC0-licensed content, and I'm not convinced that I want to opt out for other works that I have licensed under what I intended to be open source terms.

   The open source definition has famously excluded restrictions on field of use. Even as an LLM-as-generalized-AI utter sceptic, I feel like banning LLM training on work that I've released as open source would be inconsistent with my open source values.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 23-Feb-2024 08:45:59 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Cults.

     @mcdanlj @cults3d And yes this is about how people *feel*. That's why I took exception to your original post and replied.

     The idea that, as FOSS authors who follow the open source definition, we *cannot disallow* our works to be taken and consumed into LLMs because doing so would be a "field of use" restriction, *feels* like an attack on us and a demand that we yield & submit to exploitation.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 23-Feb-2024 08:46:00 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Cults.

     @mcdanlj @cults3d Some *outputs* of LLMs may be fair use when the original creative content copied through the model is minimal, but the LLMs themselves absolutely are not, at least not in any moral sense, and with any reasonableness from the courts, not in a legal sense either.

     They are gargantuan-scale commercial-purpose aggregation of lossily-compressed copies/derivatives of copyrighted works.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 23-Feb-2024 08:46:01 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Cults.

     @mcdanlj @cults3d I'm not just making a statement about legality but about intent of licenses by authors.

     We (I speak as a contributing/full author of lots of software under FOSS licenses, and I know many others who agree) do NOT intend that our works be incorporated silently into other works without the attribution and preservation of copyright notice we asked for in making our choice of license.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Michael K Johnson (mcdanlj@social.makerforums.info)'s status on Friday, 23-Feb-2024 08:46:02 JST Michael K Johnson

     in reply to

     • Rich Felker
     • Cults.

     @dalias @cults3d The argument being made is one of fair use, and I'm not opining on whether that argument will pass legal muster, and frankly I hear different opinions from different lawyers so I'm just not going to play a lawyer on the internet.

     I'm bringing in field of use not as a license consideration but as a social construct, which was why I used language of "values" and "I want" here.

     I'm posting about how I feel about this use and not making a statement about what is legally permissible. I recognize that you are making an assertion about legality. I am not trying to tell you that you are wrong. I am not convinced that there is wide consensus on this matter, though. I do have concerns about unintended side effects of saying this is not fair use. In any case it's not what I was trying to talk about at all. I was only talking through my personal feelings about my own work.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 23-Feb-2024 08:46:03 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Cults.

     @mcdanlj @cults3d This is not a restriction on field of use. It's limited terms under which derivative works can be made. *All* common open source licenses forbid incorporation into LLMs due to lack of attribution, preservation of copyright notice.

     Haelwenn /элвэн/ :triskell: likes this.