The hammer factory is not owed anything extra for the derived benefit that their product brings, why should books be different?
Authors just want kickbacks for going after the open-source AI competition in their infancy. Even they see more value in shakedowns than the books themselves.
Trained on doesn't mean significant inclusion in the final state.
Is it truly a violation of copyright when a user hacks out bits and pieces of easily restyled raw data points from a model to look samey? what about if it takes two models? Might be time to accept humans are just cooked in their ability to discern attempts at direct plagiarism - just as it is hard to discern Sky voice from Her voice.
The way it works counts if you bring prompting into it. It could easily have learned enough style chops of [author] from other sources to mimic/predict those stanzas from raw data points.
Whatever the ruling one thing is for sure, plagiarism is no longer the sincerest form of flattery. The human authors are out for AI blood on this.
An insider's trivia game means nothing if they design the test to the trajectory of LLM capabilities and not to the real world that human's value. Let every high score get fresh news coverage to align with their updated timeline scaremongering.
Let me know when there is more on the line than a misnamed test.
It will get worse right up until the revenue model stops working. I imagine that will happen when all the ad clicks are completely fake instead of just mostly fake
What's this stuff about the model catering to ‘80%’ of generative AI tasks? What model do they expect me to use for the other 20% of the time when my question needs reasoning smarts.
There are APIs that use a very small model to determine the complexity of the request then route it to different apis or models based on the result of that classifier model.
This way you can do cheap/local automatically without the api client having to know anything about it, and the proxy will send the requests out to an expensive big model only when necessary.
Only it's not smart to trust an untrustworthy thing for such matters. Better to know of capabilities and judge for yourself. Also, it'd be dumb to push wholly disagreeable propaganda, so cherry-picking from an infinite set doesn't disprove aims of propaganda.
reply