the argumentations on lagen.nu uses "plagiat" both for "this student copied a paper without citing" and "this chair looks like another design". i'd say that's sufficient to believe they are treated the same.
anyway, this was absolutely not the point of this thread. this started as a hangup on semantics, which i don't care for.
niue is not in control of the .nu domain, it's administered by the swedish internet authority. which is unfortunate, but they do receive at least some recompense for it.
documentation at lagen.nu uses "plagiat" interchangeably with "upphovsrättsbrottsligt material". argumentations in the swedish judicial system are not written in the impenetrable formal language of anglophone countries and are actually quite simple to parse, since they are not being used as precedence (since sweden is a civil law country rather than common law).
it still is, which is why shit like this is so crazy because it happens a lot.
the model keeps basically nothing of the original image, less than a single bit per work it ingests on (the LAION-B dataset is almost 6 billion images, most models have more than double the input data, the models are 5-6 GB, and each image is 1024x1024 pixels), so the image can't be in there. and yet most of these models can manage to stitch together their input data almost perfectly. it's like the model splits images into their constituent parts and builds them back the same.
from a technical standpoint it's amazingly unlikely. from a human perspective it's scummy. from a legal perspective it's 100% plagiarism.
lime! @ lime @feddit.nu Posts 2Comments 2,446Joined 11 mo. ago
the argumentations on lagen.nu uses "plagiat" both for "this student copied a paper without citing" and "this chair looks like another design". i'd say that's sufficient to believe they are treated the same.
anyway, this was absolutely not the point of this thread. this started as a hangup on semantics, which i don't care for.