Hacker News Reader

Comment by behnamoh | Hacker News Reader

Don't conflate "hacker spirit" with "unethical spirit".

I don't see anything unethical. OpenAI doesn't care about the copyright of the people who have generated their training data. Why should I care about theirs?

Especially since content produced entirely by AI is not protected by copyright in the US.

https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-copyright

Ethically you might not respect it, but practically, you might not want to be the one testing their TOS in court — or maybe you do. In either case, it’s worth caring about at least a little.

Someone with gumption might just go ahead and use GPT to train a model and then open it up as a paid competitor. Poking the bear is certainly an interesting way to spend a year for the adventurous.

You shouldn't. You should care about the contractual terms you agreed to with them. If you did not agree to their ToS and acquired content from OpenAI elsewhere, go ahead.

Nah I'm a end consumer in Europe. Most of the bullshit companies write in their ToS isn't applicable at all here, because Lawmakers know that nobody reads them anyway I doubt that even in the US they wouldn't sue if they weren't 100% of winning. They wouldn't like to have a precedent that you can use it to train other models, where right now they can scare away most people from doing it

Don't conflate "ethical" with "legal."

Yes, but opposite conclusion.

If I were the author I'd never do this because I would want an exit and this strategy + twitter thread wildly complicates any potential exit.

Even though I don't think there is anything particularly morally problematic here (I'm an information freedom maximalist).

I'm not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com