[−]written-beyond · 2026-11-15 Sun 16:20 UTC ·
link
The difference is, just as a child doesn't need to consume the entirety of a language before being able to communicate with said language, a human developer doesn't need to consume all of Stack Overflow, Open source projects etc. in order to start producing functional work.
A child or a human developer cant do all the thousands of different things an LLM can do either.
[−]written-beyond · 2026-11-15 Sun 17:11 UTC ·
link
Do you people understand that my comment was about the parent commenter exaggeration on how they were "trained" on a "massive (OSS) corpus"? I'm sorry I hurt your sacred cow by implying LLMs need stupid amounts of data.
So if future models are able to generalize better from much smaller amounts of data, you think that all the current concerns disappear? It doesn’t seem like a very good argument if it’s purely based on the amount of data needed to train a model.
What matters are things like where the data comes from, how similar the output is to the input, how close the result is to existing (copyrighted) work, and so on.
Simply using copyrighted work, even all copyrighted work, to train a model doesn’t, by itself, trigger any legal consequences. In that respect at least, the comment you called “child like” was correct.
[−]written-beyond · 2026-11-15 Sun 17:20 UTC ·
link
My comment was simply about the parent comments exaggerated claim. I do believe it should have some consequences, what those should be I am not qualified to decide.
What matters are things like where the data comes from, how similar the output is to the input, how close the result is to existing (copyrighted) work, and so on.
Simply using copyrighted work, even all copyrighted work, to train a model doesn’t, by itself, trigger any legal consequences. In that respect at least, the comment you called “child like” was correct.