Comment on OpenAI claims The New York Times tricked ChatGPT into copying its articles
ricecake@sh.itjust.works 10 months agoI don’t think it’s a question of saying they’re “asking for it”, that just feels like trying to attach an emotionally charged crime to a civil copyright question.
The technology was designed to transmit the data to a computer for ephemeral processing, and that’s how it’s being used.
It was intended to be used for human consumption, but their intent has little to do with if what was done was it was fair.
If you give something away with the hopes people will pay for more, and instead people take what you gave them under the exact terms you specified, it’s not fair to sue them.
The NYT is perfectly content to have their content used for algorithmic consumption in other cases where people want a consistently formatted, grammatically correct source of information about current events.
The question of if it’s okay or not is one that society is still working out. Personally, I don’t see a problem with it. If it’s available to anyone, they can do what they want with it. If you want to control access to it, you need to actually do that by putting up a login or in some way getting people to agree to those stipulations.
Speaking of overutilizing a thesaurus
I’m sorry some of my words were too big for you.
LWD@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Don’t flatter yourself: you aren’t even being a good pedant by trying to claim some difference between intent and design.
Great, now you’re begging for DRM.
What is it about AI that makes its evangelists mindlessly pursue it without asking whether it causes harm or not.