Which is not "theft" according to current legal precedent, and also common sense.
replyDownload a book and you are a thief
replyDownload 1 million books and you are OpenAI
What? HN has always praised Library Genesis for example.
replyHunting an animal would be considered ok by most, but scaling it to the point of damage is not ok according to most.
replyIt is theft under common sense.
replyOnly in the sense that you reading a book from the library also constitutes theft of knowledge. Does it?
replyIf I stole someone's private research notes and republished them loosely in my own words, they'd correctly be pissed
replyThis was unpublished research that was stolen, and constitutes plagiarism and academic fraud by even the strictest definition
>This was unpublished research that was stolen, and constitutes plagiarism and academic fraud by even the strictest definition
replyIt was not stolen, it was willingly given.
The terms of service does not dictate what constitutes plagiarism
reply1. using copyrighted material to train LLMs is fair use, not theft
reply2. The topic we are dissussing concerns LLMs being trained on logs from previous LLM chats. If you're prompting a model and it spits out some unique mathematical insight, you do not have copyright on that.