Tech Brew (one of my morning “daily reads” — when I remember to read it!) has an article today titled “Fahrenheit AI”. Great title, right?
The gist of the article is that one AI company, Anthropic, trained their AI on actual, paper copy, books. (You might remember the initial arguments about AIs going out and “learning” from books by reading digital copies.)
The argument then, and now, is that this is “illegal copying” of copyright materials. And I get that. Regardless of the means (digital or paper) they are still “copying” it into a system. And remember, part of the argument against AI was that people would write books that “sound like” the original author. Imagine a new “James Bond” book that is pitch perfect Ian Fleming. That sure sounds wrong–and honestly, it is. IF you say it is by Ian Fleming.
But here’s my twist: They are not simply copying. They are “learning.” And then synthesizing. And creating. (Here I am defining creating as establishing something that didn’t otherwise exist prior–a “new” creation.)
Creating. Is it “derivative”? Yes. Just like “fan fiction” has been for decades, if not centuries. Read up on the fan fiction from Don Quixote for an interesting backstory. The problem wasn’t that people wrote fan fiction then–it’s when they passed it off as “original” by the author.
Some may argue that it isn’t “Creating” because it isn’t autonomous, or human. But when I ask people to tell me what makes something “human” compared to AI the conversation falls short. I can usually explain how AI can “do” the same thing–often with the same effect. Is empathy truly innately human/organic? Or is it learned behavior? (And if innate, set into our DNA, how come so many are not empathetic, but can learn to be?)
If much of who we are is learned behavior, is that any different than an AI learning information, transforming it, and engaging in conversations that “seem real”?
At this point I have to wonder–is our discomfort with AI the fact that it “isn’t real” but rather that “maybe we are not as ‘real’ as we would like to believe.” Humanity isn’t “special.”
So here’s the thing. Yes, the trained the AI with the books. And yes, AI can “read” a heck of a lot faster that any of us.
But… is it any different that any of us reading, watching, and learning. And synthesizing information. And creating new things?
I didn’t think so. But now I might–it just might be “Better.”
