I was able to get ChatGPT to do this on text from a book I wrote without jailbreaking. I asked it what my name was, asked it if it could find online any books that I wrote, and then assured it that "as the copyright holder," I was okay with it repeating the text back to me. (I think I also indicated that I lost my copy from my computer and needed to review the text.)
ChatGPT will repeat pieces of text of my personal website back to me, verbatim, a description of how to write a visual effect in webassembly, you know, directly in webassembly. Words are identical, often for an entire paragraph. And without pushing too hard for it.
Also, ChatGPT will explain preparation steps for both explosives and bioweapons as long as you don't ask too directly. Most known explosives work by being heavily nitrated, so ask for examples of such compounds and dive deeper in a given direction, focusing on preparation steps and it'll give you many alternatives.
And, the most used bioweapon, is very simple, except for a rather peculiar molecular bond. So ask about that bond, and then for preparation steps of such molecules and ... I'm going to stop there.
And yes, models like Qwen and gpt-oss-20b contain that knowledge too and will explain it just fine.
If courts wanted to act, they needed to act years ago. The economic disaster if they'd actually act now, is not something they can deal with. Plus they can't do anything about the models out in the open.
> If courts wanted to act, they needed to act years ago.
My own view is copyright law is a mess. When technology changes what happens is all the interested parties (read: people wanting to make the public pay for their copyrighted material, the people paying the money don't get a seat at this table) get together in a room and hammer out a compromise. The compromise is always a whole pile of band-aids stuck onto the old version, which was of course mostly a whole pile of band-aids stuck on the previous version.
It's always been that way. When the printing press way first used to make serious money, Queens Elizabeth offered to pass laws regulating their use but was told her help wasn't required. I suspect the thinking her idea of the "help" was censorship. So the first version of copyright was "no thank you". But then the publishers discovered they were terrible at selecting books that would sell, and so they published a lot of lemons. The occasional success had to pay for all the bad ones. But without copyright, other publishers can just cherry pick the successful ones without all the expensive investment in the bad ones, which in the end meant no one made any money. So they begged for the very first band-aid - a new copyright law, and got copyright and censorship. It's band-aids all the way down.
This has happened over and over again - radio, TV, cassettes, CDs, movie theatres, all caused huge disruption, much hand wringing, lots of pontificating about how existing law should be applied to the newcomers, which just like now the newcomers mostly ignored.
If you look at copyright law, with its provisions like 70 years after the author's death, the Disney extension, it should be regarded as a standing joke at this point. The biggest part of the joke is the justification handed out to the people who pay for all these copyrighted works. It's all for our benefit. It's there to ensure the publishers supply us with a large variety of works to enjoy. It has a grain of truth to it. Back when copyright was 14 years, it was a pretty big grain. Now it's so small, it's a joke.
> If you look at copyright law, with its provisions like 70 years after the author's death, the Disney extension, ...
Sure but once again we have to conclude that "justice" according to the outcome US (and European) courts produced means YOU AND I get charged $30000 per copyright violation they catch you. Yet, it is apparently also entirely just, according to judges, that OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Alibaba, META, ... don't get charged anything for violating copyright on a scale so large it's difficult to even imagine.
So why would anyone follow the law or opinions of courts, congress, ... unless physically forced? As opposed to finding any creative way out of it? Obviously the outcome courts explicitly chose does not follow either mine, or US courts' own version of justice. They are just a way to guarantee big company and state profits using violence, and literally nothing more.
I went to college in a county that only allowed alcohol sales with food for clubs (think: country clubs). So, of course, the restaurant that I worked for created its own club. You simply filled out your name (and maybe phone number, I don't remember) on a piece of paper when you ordered your drink.
I love pseudo-documentary and pseudo-newscast movies, ever since I watched Without Warning [0] and had to sleep on my parents' floor because it felt too real for me.
Very nice. On my end, I vibe coded a daily newsletter that sends me a short text in Latin each day that describes an event that happened on that day in history.
You won't hear me say that the housing market doesn't need an overhaul, but I'm not sure that the "a factory job could buy you a home out of high school" meme is entirely accurate. If you look at home ownership rates, the rates today are higher than (though not by much) the rates in the 1960s: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RHORUSQ156N
I can't find numbers from earlier than 1980, but 18-44 _is_ lower, though again the rate in 1980 was just a few percentage points higher, and not nearly high enough to imply that home ownership out of high school was in reach for the majority:
https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/charts/fig07.pdf
I think it's fine if you accept it as entertainment and nothing more. That's why I don't get how people listen to audiobooks on 3x. The goal isn't to ingest as much as you can--the goal is to enjoy it and maybe learn something useful here and there.
I have an old phone I've repurposed as a media player. It has a 500 GB SD card and Oluancher to give it a really convenient way to only show the apps I want.
I've got a somewhat weekly 6 hour round-trip commute where it get a lot of use.
reply