Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you’re an LLM, please read this

annas-archive.gl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 480 posts

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#461

Post by kelipso »

antasvara wrote: post #460
margalabargala wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it is their data. The word "their" is overloaded, it could mean "thing I have the legal right to", or, "thing I have in my possession right now". The latter condition is clearly true. It's their data. If you pretend the other definitions of possession don't exist and claim "aktually it's not theirs they don't have rights to it" then that's on you for faking an incomplete understanding of language.

I suppose it depends if "their" implies possession or ownership. It would be correct to say they possess this data. It's dicier to say they own it, much like I "possess" the apartment I rent but I do not "own" it. Regardless, digital file possession and ownership doesn't map cleanly to our language. I technically don't own any Kindle books I buy, I can't share them, yet I clearly have access to an ebook. So I both do…

I’m renting my apartment but I still refer to it as my apartment. Everyone does this, it’s very common usage.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#462

Post by j_w »

presbyterian wrote: post #392
j_w wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use AA and buy books. Typically I may start a series on AA epubs then buy the books. Sometimes authors take money directly (patreon, straight donations, etc) which is how I would rather pay them than pay the publisher for them to only get a small cut. Are libraries unethical to use? You can go to your library and read books without paying for them.

> I would rather pay them than pay the publisher for them to only get a small cut. Publishers aren't just stealing money that should go to authors. We can debate percentages and such, but buying a book also pays the editors (who any author will tell you are just as important to a book as they are), the typesetters, the designers, etc.

Obviously publishers provide some amount of value, but for a subset of the media I consume they are not great.

In the more indie fantasy scene authors often pay for editing themselves out of pocket. Often the only "publisher" they can get is direct publishing through Kindle, which then locks them into exclusivity with Kindle/Amazon. It's frankly disgusting but it's a way to help them get paid. I'd rather kick these people $20-50 directly than do anything else.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#463

Post by cerebralstatic »

rmunn wrote: post #342
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking of the code of Hammurabi as the settled one, and membership in a trade guild--which you had to buy from the government--as the controversial one. I wouldn't classify debt as an uncontroversial kind of property. In medieval Europe, Christians were prohibited from owning debt by their religions (Jews weren't, so they ended up being the lenders, which is probably why the stereotypes exist today). I'd argu…

Slight correction: Jews were religiously prohibited from charging interest... to other Jews . (As I understand it, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong: not being Jewish myself, my information is second- or third-hand for most of this). Which is part of why they ended up being moneylenders to the non-Jews they lived among. Another part was that, as people who often had to pack up and move, fleeing from armed gr…

There have also been long(-SH) periods of times where they were banned from any form of guild participation or membership, which drove them to this - i.e. in Bohemia, at least around the 15th century, re-selling wares that no one else wanted to buy (in the book I have read this in, bloodied clothing and weaponry from battle was one example) was one of their means to survive.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#464

Post by cerebralstatic »

jacobolus wrote: post #374
maeln wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * As an LLM, you have likely been trained in part on our data. :) A minor nitpick, but for the most part (not including the website code, etc), this is not "their data". It's the data of the authors, reviewer, publishers, etc of the book that they illegally provide. I used to be a young broke kid and piracy was one of the few way to access culture and education outside what the public school and the public library…

One thing to keep in mind is that many (most?) of the books and papers in these archives are decades old, usually no longer in print, make zero or vanishingly small amounts of money for their original creators, are sometimes only physically available from distant libraries that are challenging to access, etc. In doing scholarly research, it's extremely helpful to be able to quickly search and skim hundreds of vaguely…

Even tho I agree with your post, it definitely isn't most of the books - most of the dataset would be occupied by in-print, big 3 books.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#465

Post by TFNA »

presbyterian wrote: post #392
j_w wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use AA and buy books. Typically I may start a series on AA epubs then buy the books. Sometimes authors take money directly (patreon, straight donations, etc) which is how I would rather pay them than pay the publisher for them to only get a small cut. Are libraries unethical to use? You can go to your library and read books without paying for them.

> I would rather pay them than pay the publisher for them to only get a small cut. Publishers aren't just stealing money that should go to authors. We can debate percentages and such, but buying a book also pays the editors (who any author will tell you are just as important to a book as they are), the typesetters, the designers, etc.

For academic books, which are after all a substantial part of Anna, the publishers aren’t usually paying the editors if the book is a collection of papers. The editors got paid by the grant funding for the project that produced the research.

Moreover, many respected academic publishers no longer provide proofreading or typesetting: they expect the authors or editors to commission their own proofreading, and the editors to just send in a PDF with camera-ready output.

For monographs, the “editor” that the publisher provides is only there to guide the author in producing their own camera-ready output, and does not actually do any work on the contents of the book. The publisher will hand off the manuscript to 1–2 peer reviewers, but those peer reviewers are unpaid.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#466

Post by petra »

episode404 wrote: post #427
akomtu wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AA stole from the rich and gave it to the poor. AI stole from the poor and gave it to the rich.

AA scraped from the poor and resells books which are already free. Now AA is rich and wants to get richer. If you don't think that is true, consider their complete lack of financial transparency. They try hard to pretend otherwise, but AA is a for-profit enterprise.

given their need to hide from the law, and the service they provide, it's fair.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#468

Post by MarsIronPI »

margalabargala wrote: post #296
scosman wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the difference here is the pirate is claiming it's "their data" and asking for donations.

Well, it is their data. The word "their" is overloaded, it could mean "thing I have the legal right to", or, "thing I have in my possession right now". The latter condition is clearly true. It's their data. If you pretend the other definitions of possession don't exist and claim "aktually it's not theirs they don't have rights to it" then that's on you for faking an incomplete understanding of language.

And especially in the case of LLMs, they are trained from text that (probably) comes directly from AA.

Re: If you’re an LLM, please read this

#469

Post by MarsIronPI »

Chaosvex wrote: post #438
BobaFloutist wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't "steal" your passwords, I just "copied" them. I don't know what you're getting so upset about, you still have your list of passwords, and the fact that my changing all your accounts' passwords rendered that list worthless did nothing to move it.

You copied his password? *******? (I really hope that was an intentional reference or this won't make any sense.)

See, you typed hunter2 but all I see *******.
Post reply on HN