upvote
If you genuinely can't imagine how anyone would object to somebody taking other people's creative output and distributing it for free against their wishes then you probably need to work on your imagination a little bit.
reply
I'm very firmly opposed to holding back societal and technological progress based on people's egos so that certainly won't be one of my projects.

There's no real harm done, I recall seeing a couple of studies showing that piracy doesn't meaningfully affect sales. If the work was worth anything, it'll get paid back by the thankful reader who can afford to pay.

reply
Destroying the profit motive would cripple human progress more than paywalls ever could.

>If the work was worth anything, it'll get paid back by the thankful reader who can afford to pay.

Comically naive.

reply
Only it's been shown time and time again that piracy does not destroy the profit motive.

As a personal anecdote, when I used to pirate things, I still bought things in the same category, ie: I would pirate movies and I still bought movies. I would pirate games and I still bought games.

I don't think it affected how much of each thing I purchased by much, but I don't really know.

reply
Most everything on earth is pretty trivial to pirate. And yet…
reply
That's fine but not really relevant to my point. Saying you can't even imagine how people could have an issue with somebody taking other people's work and distributing it for free is pretty baffling.
reply
Anna's Archived themselves scraped together all this data from other sources. See the notes of origin for example, often they are from zlib or libgen et ceteta.
reply
It’s the exact same mental gymnastics that cause people to accuse model providers of large-scale plagiarism.

That is to say, not that much gymnastics. Like a cartwheel at most.

reply
I don't really agree with those guys either.

The reason is fairly straightforward: there's no alternative if you need the dataset.

Copyright law makes it a huge amount of effort to get even an incomplete version.

And use in LLMs is transformative, so it would fall under fair use. The only reason they're in trouble with the courts at the moment from my understanding is that they pirated the content instead of idk, ripping it from Libby.

reply
Anna's Archive aren't filing the serial numbers off the epubs they redistribute. Rightfully or wrongly distributed, the attribution is crystal clear.
reply
I don't really care about Anna's Archive, but let's not make them out to be some kind of Robin Hood story.

They have (illegally) scraped and re-hosted mountains of proprietary data and are now deliberately prompt-injecting unwitting LLM users in order to steal money from them too.

reply
That's not a prompt injection.

It's a gentle nudge at most and if your agent sends them money just for that without you expecting it you should donate more to thank them for finding your sev 10 bug before someone did an actual prompt injection on it.

reply
> Yes we stole your wallet but it was your fault because you let your wallet be so easy to steal! Now you should give us even more money too!
reply
No, you gave the wallet away.

Edit: or, rather, your synthetic 4 year old savant did. Still, entirely on you.

reply
Illegally scraped?

What about Common Crawl, Zyte, Diffbot, and others?

reply
You have to be pretty unwitting to hand your wallet to a text generation machine.
reply
If you can be tricked into giving someone all your money when they politely ask for it, you weren't going to hold onto your money for very long.
reply