breppp

Fair enough you don't care, some people might want to know about the Uyghur happy camps, mass organ harvesting and such.

In a world where information sources are only going to dwindle, it is not in anyone's interest to empower actors that will use these to manipulate perceptions

Software is protected by the DMCA, patents, licenses, EULAs, all of those aren't there for books. I doubt new laws won't be written for model outputs.

Also, if model output distillation is shown as some form of reverse engineering I assume the DMCA can apply

One example is that a totalitarian government known for erasing historical record of its crimes will control an arbitrator of truth.

Reverse engineering has stronger protections than merely copyright infringement

Because model output is probably far closer to software or a licensed work which possibly has greater protections than it is to copyright. There is far less possibility of fair use, it might be protected by patents, license or reverse engineering laws.

In any case the laws are being written now, but I doubt these will have worse protection than software does, which has far better protections than copyright

I thought that went on until 2020, in any case, sure after the corporate taxes of the entire world were funneled there and had created data centers and imported a workforce to Ireland, it is now a place worth investing in.

However that does not make this construct any more moral

The low corporate tax might be fair although questionable, however the entire Double Irish Dutch Sandwich mechanism was a way to take taxes of other countries citizens

I thought that's the prior art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waldo_Moment

That and misappropriating a lot of the taxes of other countries in the process

Well I can look back and I don't see a lot of evil done in computer programming. At the worst end of the industry, all those privacy incursions can be very trivial when compared to any of the real evils of the physical world.

I think this is a marking of the overly dramatic and self centered nature of the american progressive movement, but I digress

There was no evidence for “poor people are evil”.

Most thieves, murderers, etc were poor, they weren't? Then they were explained as special cases.

When you come with a premade conclusion based on ideology it is usually very easy to find "proofs".

Think it a different way, most of the people reading this forum are at the world's top 1%. I venture to guess you as well, are you evil for hoarding all that cash? Was your 9-5 work epitome of evil?

This is simply the new "Poor people are evil" which was popular for some time.

When these kind of generalizations sound like they are flattening any resemblance of reality, it is because they are

>This is how you behave when you think you're so much smarter than everyone around you that consequences don't apply you.

To me this sounds more like an extreme response to imposter syndrome, as in take the documents and the actual knowledge with you so you won't be exposed

I realized not only did I not want my work to know what I'm doing on my personal time, the risk of cross-contamination and being accused of stealing confidential documents or a personal text making it look like I'm doing something wrong is too high.

If they wrongfully accuse you of that, isn't it a place you should leave in any case?

HIMEM.SYS and EMM386.EXE you mean :-)

Feels very reminiscent of the style of old DeCSS tshirts

https://www.wired.com/2000/08/court-to-address-decss-t-shirt...

People generally get fed the stories they already believe to be true

So that's why "Brave minority woman unfairly fired by evil AI corporation" sells better than "Self-entitled minority woman is terrible bully to colleagues"

That study statistics seem questionable at best just so to say the US should have universal health care. A lack of policy is not the same as enacting a policy, especially one that is supposed to emulate past USSR actions which they knew at the time led to millions of dead. This makes it hard to say the CCP didn't know what would happen.

Later when it was found out mass starvation to the point of wide spread cannibalism was happening they would not stop, yet continue sending their troops to steal the peasant's food and execute anyone who resisted.

We also of course have Mao quoted as saying "Death has benefits; fertilizer is created", "Half of China may well have to die", as many other quotes showing they weren't really interested in the millions that will die.

This culminating in 30 million dead in 4 years, which if we take your study at face value will take the US 100 years to achieve through "poverty related deaths", which even communist utopias have.

Regarding the Cultural Revolution I assume you agree this was intentional murder of a million+, although you seemed to challenge that in my original posting. Our current discussion seem to focus on intent even though I said "killing" which usually does imply reduced intent.

Regarding the Great Leap Forward, I do believe the CCP would prefer no deaths, and a lot of the deaths relate to strongman idiotic ideas without challenge, as is endemic in ideological totalitarian societies. However, I believe they fully knew what they were going into, without taking into account the refusal to stop, and therefore these were horrendous crimes.

The Great Leap Forward wasn't "killing" people, which implies intent. It was just good old economic mismanagement.

If both the USSR and the CCP had millions killed in the process of modernization, without stopping when knowing the death toll, maybe there's intent after all?

How would you describe the cultural revolution then? another case of economic mismanagement?

I don't know about me effecting change to the world but I am sure the tens of millions that died due to the Great Leap Forward were happy to effect change to the world so others could produce those socks

The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution are two such examples

Generally Communist nations historically favored technological development to human life in the scale of millions, keep that in mind when we enter a new economic revolution

Good. The world needs to diversify away from dependence on US technology.

In my opinion further strengthening the CCP is a disaster for the world. A government that killed millions of its own citizens to stay in power is not who I would entrust super intelligence with. But apparently we are not going to agree on that

Excerpts are often considered fair use, but it depends on country.

That had happened progressively, thumbnails for example were ruled as fair use later on, DMCA safe harbor was a huge gift for tech companies because otherwise it would curtail the ability to create platforms (relaxing copyright protections in exchange of innovation)

Nobody copied Anthropic's code. They used it's output to train another model. At most they violated some terms of service

Distilling a model is a method that can push the entire market to low margins and prevent companies from making money off such research. It also copies the Anthropic special parts (RLHF and other specific methods) rather than the "copy of the entire web" part

This is similar to what happened with Chinese reverse engineering of American manufacturing or PC clones killing IBM PCs.

Is it in the interest of the USA, probably no, that's why I assume this will be backed by law eventually

Copyright law and IP law is not the same although everyone seem to conflate the two.

Search engines for example historically ignored copyright law by copying excerpts or serving other site images, it doesn't mean someone copying Google's code has some moral frepass

No, I am saying that there is a good chance that for the good of humanity, society decides that for miracle AGI we collectively forfeit copyright in LLM training yet IP protections for model development is still kept.

There are many cases in the early 2000s were copyright protections were relaxed for tech advancements

It's more complicated than that because Google has been legally displaying other people copyrighted material for years.

In any case there's still a difference between publicly available copyrighted data and whether you can use it for model training, and the innovation around model training, RLHF, etc which you presumably have some interest as a country to allow companies to invest in with some legal protections (like the diff between patent law vs copyright law)

The issue here is not whether Anthropic used Common Crawl, Alibaba also does that.

The issue is that by distilling Claude, Alibaba reuses the IP anthropic used to train the model that's more akin to historical Chinese reverse engineering methods and disrespect of IP

I'll simplify it for you, populists from left and right (Trump and Sanchez) main trick is blaming the elites for preventing the will of the people.

This usually puts them in conflict with the judiciary, that and the fact populist government are usually incredibly corrupt (also due to contempt of existing standards)

I assume this depends if 1750ft means the location you can derive from the data (together with other data) or the precision of the individual data point

This is pretty common in any country going through a populist phase, they go against the judicial, as is happening in the US