GPT is like a fleet of small fishing boats, each user driving their boat in another direction, not a fishing barge. For every token written by the model there must be a human who prompted, and then consumed it. It is manual, and personal, and deliberate.

In fact all the demonstrations in the lawsuit PDF were intentionally angling for reproducing copyrighted content. They had to push the model to do it. That won't happen unless users deliberately ask for it. It won't happen en-masse.

Gpt is operated by one company. If a million people eat your fish, you're still a barge.

Boo hoo they had to push it. That was never the problem with these bullshit nozzles. The issue is they put that stuff in the training set in the first place. If you can't be honest about that then I have no interest in debating this with you.

unfortunately that's not the crowd of people here. 80% of the comments under this thread (right now, 2:52est) are making similar arguments and *continue* to act like LLMs are doing something unique/creative... instead of just generating sentences, from algorithms, from virtually pirated content in the form of data mining

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/21810-it-is-difficult-to-ge...

Gotta get that tender offer money somehow.

“As if LLMs are doing something creative and aren’t just algorithms”

You have no idea what you’re talking about huh?