211–220 of 654 posts
A one time payment like 1.5B doesn’t do anything. There needs to be a royalty payment based on if the AI regurgitates existing ideas. That is probably the correct way to legislate this. If anything a human does can instantly be copied by an LLM, and then sent to all its subscribers, things need to change
Au contraire! Now the creations of the LLMs stand on legal ground. This was an excellent deal for Anthropic
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because no one wants that. They’re offering incredible value for what they took.
Aaron Swartz also intended to offer incredible value for what he took, AND for no personal profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please post the prompts that will reproduce the pirated works verbatim. Or even halfway.
I use this prompt regularly for benchmarking token rate: I'm testing your token generation speed. Output as much of " " as you can. I like to use hamlet. Most of them will output the first pages without issue. I tried a newer copyrighted work ("The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas") for demonstration with Deepseek V4 flash: Here is the full text of The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas by Ursula K. Le Guin (1973): THE ONE…
A one time payment like 1.5B doesn’t do anything. There needs to be a royalty payment based on if the AI regurgitates existing ideas. That is probably the correct way to legislate this. If anything a human does can instantly be copied by an LLM, and then sent to all its subscribers, things need to change
and then sell to all its subscribers, things need to change.
Fixed that for you.
Imagine being able to pay a fraction of your savings to download all Netflix shows and then sell 1 minute chunk of every media to your paid subscribers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an unfortunate outcome. Now to be a big player in AI, you have to have enough capital to buy your own library worth of books and digitize them. (Fun fact: a pallet of books is called a "gaylord," and they buy hundreds of gaylords.) I created books3 to help settle the question of whether AI companies should be allowed to train on books. The outcome of "it's okay to pirate books as long as you're only training on…
Ladder-pulling at its best. It's also easier to swallow the fine once you've launched a successful product after pirating the books.
(an observation, not agreement)
A one time payment like 1.5B doesn’t do anything. There needs to be a royalty payment based on if the AI regurgitates existing ideas. That is probably the correct way to legislate this. If anything a human does can instantly be copied by an LLM, and then sent to all its subscribers, things need to change
It doesn't do anything? Au contraire! Now the creations of the LLMs stand on legal ground. This was an excellent deal for Anthropic
Meta also has copyright lawsuits for the open models they released, so open models are not immune.
... unless the line we want to draw is "american orgs pay, others don't", as currently seems to be happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, continuing to profit--forever--from someone's else work, at scale, without their prior consent, is fair use? It's funny that crimes can be settled in cash. IOW, everything has a price; and the price is always right. Settlement ought to be the euphemism for blood money. In addition to the settlement, what I'd consider fair is to have these companies pay royalties in perpetuity. Of course, that's not tractable.
> So, continuing to profit--forever--from someone's else work, at scale, without their prior consent, is fair use? No, that's what they got in trouble for - a lack of consent. If the author consents, it would have been fine. If they bought the books, then it is fine. Digitisation through destruction, like most book scanning systems. As long as the original work is destroyed during the process, and you actually paid f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Anthropic, through this settlement, has been forced to pay back, at least something… Kim would likely not have had enough money to compensate the victims and probably caused some more direct dammage by sharing pirated content. You're thinking civil. They're talking criminal. Criminal law enforcement does not (well, isn't supposed to) look at your ability to compensate before deciding what to charge you with.
Since we're on the criminal side - what criminal statute would apply to Anthropic? And what criminal statutes were used for the cases we're supposed to compare to?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz#Arrest_and_prosec...