AI and legal experts told the FT this “memorization” ability could have serious ramifications on AI groups’ battle against dozens of copyright lawsuits around the world, as it undermines their core defense that LLMs “learn” from copyrighted works but do not store copies.
Sam Altman would like to remind you each Old Lady at a Library consume 284 cubic feet of Oxygen a day from the air.
Also, hey at least they made sure to probably destroy the physical copy they ripped into their hopelessly fragmented CorpoNapster fever dream, the law is the law.
They’re not going to argue in good faith. The point of a lot of commenters in this place is to generate and share outrage-bait on this topic, not to participate a reasoned debate.
I think that AI is being pushed as a product idea that isn’t feasible and the people involved are spending a ton of money and negatively disrupting markets/power grids/water access/etcetc across the world but also understand that neural networks and the Transformer model are incredible inventions that have a wide range of applications.
This position seems to be heresy to many accounts that comment here.