• Dkarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    Painters replicate variations of their training pieces too. You’re pretending there’s a difference between human inspired and training inspired and that you should get paid for that inspiration in one case just cuz “big corp”

    • BURN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Because there is a difference. A computer does not learn or understand anything. Human beings can transform a concept. A LLM or other generative AI does not transform a concept at all.

      • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        So if I ask it to create a story about a cow juggling bowling balls, it was not creating an original story? Just spitting out stories it has heard of before?

        Edit: missed a ‘not’.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          It’s spitting out variations of the statistical results based on your input parameter. It reorganizes ideas and reorganizes the stories it has seen into something else. That’s not transforming the data by adding something new, rather just retrofitting existing data to sound like it’s creating something new

          • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            retrofitting existing data to sound like it’s creating something new.

            What the difference? That is basically how new human ideas are formed. Did you think you add completely new ideas everytime you transform your previous knowledge?

            But since you’re so confident in your claims, I’m sure it should be easy to prove the following ChatGPT output is not new and can be easily traced back to its training data:

            Prompt: Create a short poem about a cow juggling bowling balls on a boat

            Output: In a boat on gentle waves it sways, A cow, not grazing in greenish bays. Hooves deftly juggle, balls in flight, Bowling orbs, a whimsical sight.

            Bovine artist, on the sea’s embrace, Balancing spheres with tranquil grace. Ocean breeze, a playful gale, A cow’s performance, a quirky tale.