Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

17
  • 26
    This makes me more comfortable about the liability accrued by OpenAI's actions (which, unless copyright law is changed, Stack Exchange can not afford to take on). Unless they have secret technology they haven't released (not unlikely), OpenAI does not have the capacity to provide attribution in their AI systems. Are all parties comfortable with a partnership where one of the partners isn't allowed to do anything? Commented May 6, 2024 at 17:11
  • 86
    Why isn't this in the body of the question post? Commented May 6, 2024 at 18:09
  • 22
    Will this really be attribution, or will the output of ChatGPT just be used to find random posts that happen to resemble the answer? I suspect the latter. Commented May 6, 2024 at 18:29
  • 16
    This statement is very weak, especially the "in a license-compliant way". The attribution clauses in the CC licenses have a lot of ambiguity and the "reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context" leaves outs for the person receiving the content. It's very possible to be fully compliant with the license with respect to attribution and have a very weak form of it. Commented May 6, 2024 at 21:30
  • 57
    I will be expecting my username to be attributed to every output made by this AI model (which itself will be licensed CC-BY-SA) assuming any content I have contributed is used to train it, as dictated by CC-BY-SA. A note giving attribution to SO/SE as a whole is not enough, it has to be my username, otherwise it is a breach of license and I will take appropriate action and issue takedown notices to stop any parties violating my copyright. CC-BY-SA is very explicit about this. I doubt I'm the only one going to do this. Are you going to comply with this? Commented May 6, 2024 at 22:22
  • 46
    Please also remember that according to section 6 of the CC-BY-SA license, any breach of the license not cured within 30 days of you being informed of it will terminate the license. This would render displaying affected contributions on any of your sites and using your AI illegal, with or without attribution. I promise to that I will do everything in my power to see my copyright upheld and I urge all users to do the same. This kind of willful ignorance of copyright on part of SE should not be tolerated. Commented May 7, 2024 at 1:30
  • 5
    "There aren’t specific details yet because the work is just starting..." It would be very nice if more specific details could be shared when the work has progressed more, just to be more assured. Commented May 7, 2024 at 6:39
  • 30
    "There aren’t specific details yet because the work is just starting...". It is pretty scary (to say the least) that this kind of core questions were not answered prior to any agreements and any announcements. When such a dividing topic is announced, I think we could expect to have some FAQ with explicit answers about such obvious issues for SO/SE users Commented May 7, 2024 at 8:47
  • 13
    Problem is we heard the same assurances lots of times already for many of the past projects that crashed and burned. Another "we don't have anything to share and work is just starting but don't worry, it will be totally fine when the feature is rolled out" doesn't cut it at this point. I'd bet a full years' salary that this will not be delivered in a way that satisfies the community, and probably not even in a way that satisfies the letter of the license. Commented May 7, 2024 at 10:45
  • 20
    And also, the "socially responsible AI" thing is a bad joke. What's supposed to be responsible about wasting tons of energy and resources on an inaccurate text generator that (assuming this will be based on GPT-4 or later) has a foundation stemming from egregious data slurping and copyright abuse, and includes all manner of problematic content in its training data (racism, conspiracies, etc). Commented May 7, 2024 at 10:51
  • 5
    So attribution for the training data should be given to the person who posted an AI-generated answer, which was obtained from training the AI on data for which attribution should be given-... Why doesn't OpenAI see that this is a loop that only serves to make their AI increasingly dumber with every iteration? SO the company was first insisting that AI generated posts are good for the site, only stepping back after massive criticism. And now you are trying to sell access to the data which the company itself has actively encouraged to get polluted with AI content. What's the longterm plan here? Commented May 7, 2024 at 11:11
  • 31
    @Rosie, I find it hard to believe that Stack & OpenAI have gotten as far as announcing the partnership in a joint press release if the terms & conditions of the data licensing were not already sorted out as part of any contractual agreement. Commented May 7, 2024 at 19:43
  • 9
    As an additional point, AI uses vast amount of energy. I'd like to see a commitment that OpenAI can't use SO training data on servers not powered by renewable energy under any circumstances. Commented May 10, 2024 at 13:01
  • 2
    When I use Windows Copilot or Bing Chat, all of the codes coming from StackOverflow are clearly linked there, that's exactly how I've found many answers. So I don't know why some people are worried about attributions. One of the Windows Copilot's main feature is showing the source of the information so we can verify it and not blindly trust whatever it tells us. Commented May 14, 2024 at 17:41
  • 2
    @Kryomaani "Please also remember that according to section 6 of the CC-BY-SA license, any breach of the license not cured within 30 days of you being informed of it will terminate the license." did you post that as an answer? I think more people need to know about all this. Commented May 14, 2024 at 18:20