Timeline for Our Partnership with OpenAI
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 3 at 19:37 | comment | added | endolith | @Poscat thefashionlaw.com/… | |
| Jun 3 at 6:31 | comment | added | Poscat | @endolith Do you have a link to the case? | |
| Jun 2 at 22:38 | comment | added | endolith | @Poscat How is it an open question? Foundation models have been shown to reproduce verbatim copies of copyrighted works, and have been sued for it... | |
| May 17 at 1:22 | comment | added | Poscat | that's certainly an open question since insofar no generative AI has generated a copyrightable work (a work needs to be sufficiently long to demonstrate creativity to be copyrightable). | |
| May 16 at 22:59 | comment | added | endolith | @Poscat So if an AI "generates" a verbatim copy of a copyrighted work, then it becomes public domain? | |
| May 15 at 10:04 | comment | added | Poscat | @endolith AI generated works cannot be copyrighted, at least in the US, they are automatically in the public domain. | |
| May 15 at 1:21 | comment | added | Criticizing Israel not allowed | @MaximEgorushkin Nobody was going to sue SO over a minor change which retained the spirit of the license despite violating the letter. This violates both. | |
| May 13 at 10:10 | comment | added | stackoverblown | They are not going to listen to you. Money >>>> all of us! | |
| May 12 at 22:15 | comment | added | endolith | @MaximEgorushkin guides.library.emerson.edu/FairUse | |
| May 12 at 5:04 | comment | added | Maxim Egorushkin | @endolith Do you attribute anything of your speech to what you read and heard? Or is that just fair use? It is an open issue, I suppose. LLMs will make human answers more valuable, IMO: get these words for free, or ask a human to read your drivel and point you to duplicate answer for a fee? | |
| May 12 at 4:54 | comment | added | Maxim Egorushkin | @endolith What would make SO abide the license? Any precedents? Any pending litigation? Didn't SO change content licensing overnight in the past? How can it attribute a license to anything since it is not citing anything, but generates next words? | |
| May 11 at 18:09 | comment | added | endolith | @MaximEgorushkin The owners of SO are free to make money off our content, but they must abide by the CC BY-SA license, which requires that derivative works be shared under a compatible license and include attribution. OpenAI doesn't currently provide attribution, and almost certainly is not going to open-source their LLMs. | |
| May 11 at 3:29 | comment | added | Maxim Egorushkin | It makes money for owners of SO. Everything you post can and will be sold as training data. | |
| May 10 at 1:00 | history | edited | This_is_NOT_a_forum | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Active reading [<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_artificial_intelligence> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/trust#Noun>] - if it is for emphasis, we have italics and bold on this platform.
|
| May 7 at 19:55 | history | answered | Free Palestine | CC BY-SA 4.0 |