redcobra762
redcobra762 on Hacker News
It's not likely you've actually gotten the opinion of the "majority of tech folks", just the most outspoken ones, and only in specific bubbles you belong to.
We're operating under a model where the owner of the copyright
has already sold their work. And while it's within their rights to stipulate conditions of the sale, they did not do that, and fair use of the work as governed under the laws the book was sold under encompasses its conversion into an LLM model.
If the author didn't want their work to be included in an LLM, they should not have sold it, just like if an author didn't want their work to inspire someone else's work, they should not have sold it.
Making a digital copy of a physical book is fair use under every legal structure I am aware of.
When you do it for a transformative purpose (turning it into an LLM model) it's certainly fair use.
But more importantly, it's ethical to do so, as the agreement you've made with the person you've purchased the book from included permission to do exactly that.
If you reproduce the material from a work you've purchased then of course you're in violation of copyright, but that's not what an LLM does (and when it does I already conceded it's in violation and should be stopped). An LLM that
doesn't "sell goods with movie characters" is not in violation.
And the harm you describe is not a recognized harm. You don't own information, you own creative works in their entirety. If your work is simply a reference, then the fact being referenced isn't something you own, thus you are not harmed if that fact is shared elsewhere.
It is an abuse of the courts to attempt to prevent people who have purchased your works from using those works to train an LLM. It's morally wrong.
It's abusive and wrong to try and prevent AI companies from using your works at all.
The whole point of copyright is to ensure you're paid for your work. AI companies shouldn't pirate, but if they pay for your work, they should be able to use it however they please, including training an LLM on it.
If that LLM reproduces your work, then the AI company is violating copyright, but if the LLM doesn't reproduce your work, then you have not been harmed. Trying to claim harm when you haven't been due to some philosophical difference in opinion with the AI company is an abuse of the courts.
You genuinely read this ad and think there's something to be learned?
If I take this concept seriously for a few seconds, it's one massive exercise in begging the question. The argument boils down to "notice when you do something wrong" while simultaneously admitting that people don't do that. And the ad's advice for doing it? Do it. What?!
That's profoundly stupid as a concept, where "profoundly stupid" here is defined specifically as an argument with a clear reasoning issue.
You know one great way to stop smoking? By stopping. OP is stealing Bob Newhart's bit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcSAQyzPcl0
You're presupposing that this blogvertisement ought not be considered profoundly stupid.
What would my virtue garnish be if I wanted to think of this blatant attempt at shilling a book as a waste of digital space?
Sorry to be clear: I want to reinforce my belief that this ad you've posted is profoundly stupid.
What would my virtue garnish be for that?
PayPal terrifies me; I would move off of their platform ASAP, or at least be ready to when they inevitably pull the "lock your account pending an investigation" move that kills so many new companies.
If you've been to one of these testing centers, you'd realize it's not easy to cheat, and the companies that run them take cheating seriously. The audacity of someone to cheat in that environment would be exceptionally high, and just from security theater alone I suspect almost no actual cheating takes place.
What is the human counterpart to an LLM? The article doesn't describe.
And "LLM apologists" is so polemical it's hard to take seriously. We get it, you don't like GenAI. That's fine, but can we talk about it without getting normative?
Or maybe he could care less, but doesn't even bother to care less because caring less would exert effort and he doesn't care enough to exert any effort.
The "criticism" of a p-value was strange to me, because it's never taught to be an "end all" answer to a question, rather it's taught as a way of determining statistical significance. Every stats or economic analytics course I took in college explained that hypothesis rejection involved critical thinking in addition to p-value analysis.
Yes, moving to a freshly 1.0 tool/library is often the best way to gain stability...
No, eggs are not full of shit, PETA is. It's a hateful organization that does not give a flying fuck about animals, only about fundraising.
PETA is full of shit, to the point where you could probably safely take on the opposite of their position on any given issue and presume to be correct, generally.
I genuinely don't understand why the focus is on egg prices. Who out there is paying more than a total of $3-$5/month more in eggs? And no, even to the absolutely poorest among us, that's not a meaningful amount.
Yes, egg prices, as a percentage are going up a lot, but as an absolute value? I can get a dozen eggs from Walmart right now for $5.46. That isn't, by any measurement, a lot of money more than I would have paid a year ago.
Aren't you actually arguing in favor of profit-driven behavior? You're not disagreeing with profit as a motivator, you're questioning if the 30,000 employees is the maximal way to achieve profit.
“Attacked” what does this even mean? The courts have zero power in the first place, and never have. The judiciary, all the way back to Marbury v. Madison, has had to rely on the assent from the other branches that its rulings matter.
There isn’t an enforcement arm of the Supreme Court. If you ever, at any point, thought the US Marshals mattered one iota in all of this, you completely misunderstood the role of the judiciary in the US government.
Congress has the power of the purse, the executive has the power of the sword, and the judiciary has… the hope that the other two branches will listen. Federalist 78 would be a good read for you now, if you think this has any relevance at all towards the judiciary’s ability to enforce anything.
This EO has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the courts or their interpretation of the law.
This is entirely focused on aligning the executive branch, that’s it. This is the kind of confusion that comes with trusting a Reddit post instead of getting your news from a reputable source.
Here, read this before going any further: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/18/trump-order-power-i...
It’s bad because it’s an attempt at removing independence from certain independent organizations such as the SEC and the Federal Reserve, but it is not about claiming all legal authority rests with the executive. It will fail as an EO because the executive can’t violate the law, which has set out the independent nature of these organizations.
Trump may also might have SCOTUS justices imprisoned, or he might march troops into every major city, since we’re just making things up now…
Get a grip, you embarrass yourself by repeating this bullshit.
Firstly, a Reddit post? Really? If this is so monumentally important, surely there’s a better source to submit.
Secondly, nothing here changes the actual law, as that’s not how executive orders work. This will be challenged and if it goes beyond the scope of executive powers, it will be curtailed or shut down.
Thirdly, “De facto dictatorship” is a complete lie and throws away whatever credibility the submitter of this Reddit post was trying to maintain.
The very day your colleagues and your own career are put under jeopardy is a day you will not be at your best. Chaos breeds error, and Trump’s treatment of federal employees is the very definition of chaos.
American company, taking off from an American airport with mostly American passengers.
The only thing about this flight that wasn’t American is the destination…
No. You missed the rest of the statement: "there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them."
Four paragraphs about the logistics of these cups was too much for me…