Rather than delete, modify the question so its wrong. Then the ai will hallucinate.
this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
1719 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
69891 readers
2719 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't understand what anyone wins from this
Corporations are foundationally evil
And how do they not win more if we poison the entire Internet?
It's like being in a toxic relationship with kids involved
Set boundaries
Follow rules
Don't destroy the fucking fruit of your bodies just because you are angry at each other
Fuck those guys, like a lot, for taking your given data and selling
And fuck open ai for trying to make money from scientific discoveries meant for all of humanity
But what the fuck with ruining the entire Internet?
Who gets anything then?
If language models will ruin Internet why be afraid that normal human responses are available? Wut?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Why does OpenAI want 10 year old answers about using jQuery whenever anyone posts a JavaScript question, followed by aggressive policing of what is and isn't acceptable to re-ask as technology moves on?
They probably aren't looking for the factual information, perhaps more the logical thinking abilities.
load more comments
(4 replies)
You can't quit, you're fired!!!!
Cool, now I can go collect unemployment. :)
You can't, you're hired!
Instead of solely deleting content, what if authors had instead moved their content/answers to something self-owned? Can SO even claim ownership legally of the content on their site? Seems iffy in my own, ignorant take.
Everything you submit to StackOverflow is licensed under either MIT or CC depending on when you submitted it.
So does that mean anyone is allowed to use said content for whatever purposes they'd like? That'd include AI stuff too I think? Interesting twist there, hadn't thought about it like this yet. Essentially posters would be agreeing to share that data/info publically. No different than someone learning how to code from looking at examples made by their professors or someone else doing the teaching/talking I suppose. Hmm.
For super permissible licenses like MIT then it's probably fine. Maybe folks would need to list the training data and all the licenses (since a common requirement of many of even the most permissible licenses is to include a copy of the license).
As far as I know, a court hasn't ruled on whether clauses like "share alike" or "copy left" (think CC BY-SA or GPL) would require anything special or not allow models. Anyone saying otherwise is just making a best guess. My best guess is (pessimistically) that it won't do any good because things produced by a machine cannot be copyrighted. But I haven't done much of a deep dive. I got really interested in the differences between many software licenses a few years back and did some reading but I'm far from an expert.
CC (not sure about MIT) virtually always requires attribution, but as GitHub Copilot showed right now open-"media" authors have basically no way of enforcing their rights.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
They can. It's in the TOS when you make your account. They own everything you post to the site.
Well I suppose in that case, protesting via removal is fine IMO. I think the constructive, next-step would be to create a site where you, the user, own what you post. Does Reddit claim ownership over posts? I wonder what lemmy's "policies" are and if this would be a good grounds (here) to start building something better than what SO was doing.
A SO alternative cannot exist if a user who posted an answer owns it. That defeats the purpose of sharing your knowledge and answering questions as it would mean the person asking the question cannot use your answer.
A SO alternative cannot exist if a user who posted an answer owns it. That defeats the purpose of sharing your knowledge and answering questions as it would mean the person asking the question cannot use your answer.
Couldn't these owners dictate how their creations are used? If you don't own it, you don't even get a say.
That's the point of platforms like SO - you give away your knowledge, for free, for everyone, for any use case. If a user can restrict the use of their answers, then it makes no sense for SO to exist. It's like donating food to a food bank and saying that your food should only go to white people and not black people.
load more comments
(1 replies)