I'd say a lot of people even have an incentive to not give credit to the LLMs, because there is a social stigma associated with using AI, due to its association with low-quality work.
I'm guessing the music business right now is absolutely awash with unreported and uncredited AI lyrics and backing tracks. It's an area where you can get away with it a lot easier than in the visual arts.
People are delusional. There’s a large cohort of folks on HN who still think AI is just a stochastic parrot. Depending on the topic or the thread you’ll find more of those people and get voted down if you even imply that LLMs can reason.
They are to some extent though. The bigger point is that they are not just a stochastic parrot. But examples like the modified riddles where they just answer the original riddle shows that they have the behaviour of stochastic parrots at least some of the time.
Yeah you're right. I guess that's the spirit of my intent, to say they are more than stochastic parrots... a behavior they, like humans, exhibit sometimes
I don’t think it’s that they don’t have the incentive. I think it’s because it’s unclear if you give credit to the LLM if that means that OpenAI or similar would be considered an author in which case that could really screw up intellectual property and make using LLMs much less attractive. If the LLM wants attribution then it’s sentient, and if it’s sentient, it may be given personhood (Johnny-five scenario) and get rights, and then it would be a writer, and it could influence the license and intellectual property may belong partially to it unless it willingly became and employee of a ton of companies and organizations or contracted with them.
