fmaury/seirdy.one
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://git.sr.ht/~seirdy/seirdy.one synced 2024-12-24 01:42:10 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

New note: Re: GH copilot takes

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Rohan Kumar 2022-07-20 08:55:43 -07:00
parent c0904f3b32
commit efe67e9136
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 1E892DB2A5F84479
1 changed files with 17 additions and 0 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

17
content/notes/re-gh-copilot-takes.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
---
title: "Re: GH Copilot takes"
date: 2022-07-20T08:55:38-07:00
replyURI: "https://mastodon.social/@humanetech/108677838939825183"
replyTitle: "Fully IANAL philosophical showerthoughts"
replyType: "SocialMediaPosting"
replyAuthor: "Humane Tech Now"
replyAuthorURI: "https://mastodon.social/@humanetech"
---
> They are like workers that are hired.
Laws around "works for hire" come with their own copyright baggage that assumes workers are actual people; for instance, these laws include mechanisms by which workers can claim copyright themselves.
I'm not opposed to the general principle of training a model on copyrighted works potentially being fair use; however, the generated works would need to be sufficiently novel or seemingly "creative" by human standards for it to work. Otherwise, you're in "derived work" territory. This, I think, is a major difference between the likes of DALL-E and Midjourney, and the likes of Copilot.
I personally found all the discourse way too hilarious, and wrote a satirical article on it only to get clobbered by Poe's Law: <cite><a href="{{<relref "/posts/experiment-copilot-legality">}}">An experiment to test GitHub Copilot's legality</a></cite>.