Fundamentally that’s a purely ethical decision about whether a machine doing something should be treated with the same understanding the same as a human would. But we don’t consider remembering something with a neurochemical storage the samd as taking a picture of something even if they’re basically the same.
Comment on Linus Torvalds to critics of AI coding in Linux: "Fork it. Or just walk away."
Epp@lemmus.org 13 hours agoHard disagree.
This is like saying anyone who has watched a Disney movie now owes Disney a check any time they illustrate anything, even entirely unrelated, because they’ve learned from their commercial products in the past. If they don’t pay Disney, then their creations are based on theft.
Einskjaldi@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
Epp@lemmus.org 5 hours ago
That’s because taking a picture is an idetic copy. Machine learning is NOT copying, it’s learning - hence the name.
NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 5 hours ago
This is a misunderstanding based on confusion between technical and colloquial terminology.
A machine learning model “learns” information in the same way that a curve fitting algorithm “learns” the shape of a data set.
This is not the same as the colloquial meaning of human learning. It is a mathematical process.
Epp@lemmus.org 3 hours ago
That’s splitting hairs on definitions, with no change in meaning. It’s still not copying the data, and is far closer to a person learning than to a picture taken by a camera.
NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 4 hours ago
Digital reproduction is digital reproduction no matter how many extra steps are added to the reproduction process. It’s just an algorithm that sorts through a collection of stored data to find specific pieces of data which best fit the keywords supplied by the user, then regurgitates the results that are the best match based on correlation.
In spite of common meaning overlap and popular metaphors, the human brain is not a computer. Ask any neurologist.