freejazz

That's a big leap

If money is the only incentive, then it's not a product of artistic work.

This is just bullshit and no one said it's the only incentive.

There are a lot of alternative ways to fulfill that mandate that don't include a lot of the baggage we have presently in copyright law which is now slowing down progress.

such as??

And?

There needs to be a way to support the creation of art.

Yeah, it's called "copyright."

Sorry, I'm thinking of Kadrey, where the court rejected Anthropic's "training" argument and provided an explanation as to how author litigants should demonstrate market harm in order to succeed on a fair use analysis, a factor that Alsup did not effectively weigh.

if you can't persuade the machine to spit substantially the same text back out verbatim

That's exactly what they've done in a number of the lawsuits, so I'm not sure why you think that hasn't occurred.

Well, there is nothing to distribute if the author is not incentivized to write... which you seemed to skip past.

So will you owe life long compensation for all the knowledge you got from books too?

You're just falling into the trap of anthropomorphizing the phrase "training" in the context of LLMs, which is not the same things as what humans do. There is no evidence they are the same thing and there is nothing to support the notion that what an LLM does when it "trains" on a book is equivalent to a human reading it.

It's not a settled area of law and there is a SDNY judge that has a completely different application of the fair use analysis in the same exact context and came to a completely different conclusion (that it is not fair use).

But if I'm reading the ruling correctly, Anthropic might have been fine even with feeding pirated books into their LLM (as long as they planned to eventually deleted them afterwards)

You're not. Even if training is fair use, it doesn't mean you can steal copies to train the model. It just means the training itself isn't an infringement (in Alsup's opinion). Stealing the copies of the books was an infringement and that's exactly the liability that Anthropic settled.

There needs to be a royalty payment based on if the AI regurgitates existing ideas.

The settlement does not pertain to any outputs

Did you read the complaint? Maybe start there if you're going to be asking questions like this.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28453229-apple-v-ope...

He's getting sued too.

If Ben and Jerry's didn't disseminate your memo on how to steal trade secrets from your former employer to its new hires, I'd think you'd have a better point.

Anyone is free to demand anything. You can even say no to a judge. You wont like that result, though.

But he stole it, no? What's ambiguous about that?

There are no practical laws against understanding the laws of physics, chemistry, and metallurgy when it comes to anodizing

And unsurprisingly, that's not what the lawsuit is over!

Unnecessarily cute? It's a documented campaign of industrial-scale theft...

Painfully obtuse

You're a troll

Hard to make it clearer that you didn't read/understand the decision than a post like this

It's like you are starting to get it.

Nobody whose family comes from China, Vietnam, etc., has grandparents who could vote in 1950.

So those countries should deal with those issues, then? I really don't understand how you are allowed to post so much all over this website. No less in such an intentionally obtuse and argumentative manner.

You can’t have class actions based on pre-existing groups (say, “Italians”). You have to define the group in a way that provides a high level of certainty that all class members were subject to the harm that’s the basis for the suit.

Yeah, and?

No response on the 19th amendment?

In what way did your cousin ever have anything in this context? His admission wasn't rescinded, he never had it in the first place.

But we are talking about new data centers that are usually being built for the exact purpose of housing AI facilities? I'm not sure why you are being so obtuse about this point. Stating what already exists in data centers in general misses the point, either in ignorance or you are just being disingenuous. Given that you don't seem ignorant, it leaves the rest of us with the belief it'd only be the latter.

40 is a massive number

Where does that leave 60, then?

areas won't move the needle

Wont move the needle? Go ahead and build shit in your community, I'm happy its being kept out of mine. Stop trying to pretend like NY is trying to legislate the nation by maintaining its own front and backyard.

Yeah! It really sucks. Still, what should NY do of that?

that doesn’t mean the government is efficient or without fraud

Don't really see anyone suggesting that.

Doge was a scam, of course.