• Chahk@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    if a human is allowed to write a summary of a book, why should an AI not be allowed to do the same thing?

    Said human presumably would have to purchase or borrow a book in order to read it, which earns the author some percentage of the profits. If giant corps want to use the books to train their LLMs, it’s only fair that they’d have to negotiate with the publishers much like libraries do.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Said human presumably would have to purchase or lend a book in order to read it

      Borrowing a book from a library doesn’t earn the author any more profits for each time it’s lended out, I don’t think. My local library just buys books off Amazon.

      What if I read the CliffNotes and make my own summary based on that? What if I read someone else’s summary and reword it? I think that’s more like what ChatGPT is doing - I really don’t think it’s being fed entire copyrighted books as training data. There’s no actual proof LibGen or ZLib is being used to train it.

      • jursed@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        authors do get money from libraries that buy the books. and in some places they even get money depending on how much its checked out.