The resulting paper, which was written since then, coincidentally advocates that there are no Copyrights on weights and that those are non-expressive representations, and yet those get reassembled magically into expressions that can be Copyrighted at inference time.
ETHICS
-
Legal Protection for AI Companies: Training Data and Output Defense
By
–
The most value for lawyers and their lawfirms is in defending AI companies at the training stage 1) inputs, and then secondarily, 3) outputs. If the rights for model weights 2) can't be secured, then fine that's an acceptable tradeoff because 1) is critical.
-
Legal battles over LLaMA weights and AI output ownership rights
By
–
VanL was hired by theshawwn to handle a DMCA claim by Meta about taking down the LLaMa weights, so they're trying to prove that weights are in the public domain. He was also hired by icreatelife to attempt to show that it's possible to own rights on the outputs of AI systems.
-
AI Decision-Making: Countering the Outsourcing Concerns
By
–
AI doomers are quick to point out that AI is the only tech humans have developed that can make decisions. How do we counter the argument that outsourcing our decisions is bad for humanity? (FYI, an AI made the attached picture of an AI making decisions).
-
Stochastic Parrots Paper Accessible via ACM Digital Library
By
–
Thank you, @cher0x801 Also — Stochastic Parrots was published as Open Access. There's absolutely no need to point to random storage locations. It will remain accessible at its point of publication in the ACM Digital Library:
-
Ableism in AI Discourse: Critiquing Blindness Metaphors
By
–
In case it isn't obvious why this is ableism — it's equating blindness with lack of knowledge or inability to know. This is harmful and detracts from the point.
-
Public Inattention and Tech Obfuscation in Surveillance Systems
By
–
The overall point is a good one, and would be more effectively made by talkin about "inattention" (on the part of the populace) or "obfuscation" (on the part of those selling or using surveillance tech). >>
-
Machine Intelligence Political Deployment Society Blindness Concern
By
–
So it's really a shame that the article ends like this: "It is not AI but our sense of fatalism and our blindness to the way human societies are already deploying machine intelligence for political ends that should most worry us." There's no call to use "blindness" there. >>
-
Moral Outsourcing: Removing Humans From AI Accountability
By
–
"Too often when we talk of the “problem” of AI, we remove the human from the picture. We practise a form of what the social scientist and tech developer Rumman Chowdhury calls “moral outsourcing”: blaming machines for human decisions." >>
-
Digital Panopticon: AI Systems Require Human Accountability
By
–
"We have stumbled into a digital panopticon almost without realising it. Yet to suggest we live in a world shaped by AI is to misplace the problem. There is no machine without a human, and nor is there likely to be." >>