undefined | Better HN

0 pointsshagie3y ago0 comments

Why did you pick that index rather than some other source material? Roses are red dates back to 1784 (year not index number) as a nursery rhyme. Does it need to be credited or is it in the public consciousness to the point where one can create a poem based on it without knowing its original source?

    Write a haiku about bacon and coffee.  Identify the syllable count for each word and line used in the haiku.
    Example:
    Bacon (2) sizzles (2)
    Aroma (3) of (1) coffee (2) too (1)
    Mouthwatering (4) bliss (1)

    Smoky (2) bacon (2)
    Brewing (3) coffee (2) aroma (3)
    Makes (1) mornings (2) bright (2)

The second poem is from GPT. Do we need to credit the dictionary where it got the syllable count for each word? Or where it got that coffee (rather than bacon) is brewed? Or that bacon and coffee are things more often consumed in the morning?

    Identify four foods or beverages that are frequently consumed in the morning and how each is prepared for breakfast.

    1. Coffee: prepared by brewing hot water over ground coffee beans.
    2. Cereal: prepared by pouring cereal into a bowl and adding milk.
    3. Toast: prepared by toasting bread and adding butter and/or jelly.
    4. Eggs: prepared by scrambling, frying, poaching, or boiling them.

There is a difference between "identifying a source where this information can be found" and "this is the (copyrighted) source of the data that GPT used to draw upon to come up with the statement."

The first is an exercise for the reader (and much better done and evaluated by the reader). The second is what people are concerned about.

0 comments

anonymouskimmer3y ago

I'm concerned about both. I'm a "people".

> Why did you pick that index rather than some other source material?

I told you why references were important in scientific documents already.

shagieOP3y ago

Scientific documents - certainly. If you are writing a research paper or encyclopedia, I expect it to be well cited.

If you are writing something that is synthesizing knowledge (not just reporting the facts), the "where are all the places were that knowledge came from" is an impossible task for human or machine.

If I ask GPT to create a poem in the style of Roses are Red about coffee and bacon - why should that request need to be citied to the same degree of scrutiny as an encyclopedia or research paper?

If, on the other hand, you're trying to use GPT to write such a paper... I would hold that you're doing it wrong. It doesn't do that well. The model is "about" transforming language. To do so, it has a fair bit of 'knowledge' that it contains to be able to do that accurately. OpenAI makes no claims about the accuracy of the content that GPT produces (its improved, it can more accurately answer data - but if you want to know the answer it is no better than your next door neighbor who has read a lot).

If you are claiming that the example of Bacon is Greasy poem that GPT wrote is infringing any more than a child's "roses are red, my cat is orange, his eyes are green, nothing rhymes with orange" then I believe you will face an uphill battle.

To say that there is plagiarism and infringement going on - it needs examples rather than a "I think it works this way and is just regurgitating material it was fed from elsewhere."

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse