> They don't share much

Why not?

As society's repositories of knowledge, I feel like AI should fall under libraries. Especially considering how AI utilizes others knowledge/text they don't legally have rights to. The carveout we made slightly similar (in that they have special rules for their use) is for libraries.

I pirate everything. I pay nothing. I have both DRM free and cost free. This is the best of both worlds.

They do, but under a completely different system than the way that they do for print books. When a library buys a print book, they can keep it in circulation for as long as they want and it's physically durable, but for digital, they're paying either per circulation or for an amount of time. They never own anything, they pay for temporary licenses, just like you never own the digital media you purchase in most cases.

The point that the person you're replying to is making is that this totally breaks the way libraries have always worked, and that it takes a lot of power away from the buyers (whether that's you or your local library) and puts way more in the hand of the publishers.

Even libraries can only license digital content for a limited period of time/loans before being forced to purchase new licenses. See https://www.spokanelibrary.org/the-true-cost-of-ebooks-and-a...

But those libraries have to pay each time they loan those digital goods. It's not the old "pay once loan until it's dust" model they use for physical goods.

can I donate my ebook to them?

That's exactly what jonhohle was talking about -_-

Can I download an archive of movies so a human animator can study the techniques there?

Surely you have to make the copy to feed it into the llm for training, so

Showing up is a trap for Anna - who doesn't have 5 billion dollars to settle.

Justice should not depend on whether the aggrieved appears in court. That's a structural weakness of US law.

Uh, aren't you confirming his opinion with that? After all, Anna doesn't have the money to fight this in court

Anthropic knows they could just pay off the aggrieved party.

The operators of Anna's know they will go to prison.

It's definitely a stupid move. Even if you are going to do it, it should be completely independently of AA to distribute the risk.

Nope, only metadata so far. They keep promising to release the files, but havent yet.

But what about the clout.

Some people may say that Anna's has great OPSEC because she hasn't been identified following this release, but part of OPSEC is reliability, which they clearly failed at with the Spotify release. They let ego come in front of their OPSEC.

http://opbible7nans45sg33cbyeiwqmlp5fu7lklu6jd6f3mivrjeqadco...

Let's not forget the Julian Assange extradition fiasco.

Pretty successfully I would say. Armed police raided the server hosting provider scaring the shit out of some dudes who were just monitoring the power basically. And people went to prison.

cTLDs do things very differently

How to treat European Citizens' personal data.

You as a business are free to not to business with Europeans.

It’s not as weird or US-specific as always assumed. If someone brings a case in a US jurisdiction the judge isn’t going to say, “Sorry, they’re international, they’re free to commit those crimes.” They issue a judgment according to the law and leave the enforcement to the limits of jurisdiction.

These judgments aren’t always pointless. Many Internet companies and services intersect with the US in some way, so there could be an angle where this impacts them.

Businesses operating strictly in other countries don’t need to comply with foreign laws except in cases where they need to do business with those countries, at which point it becomes complicated and they may choose to comply to avoid problems or sanctions.

Performance art is a huge part of the justice system. That's why there's the funny clothes and titles. A major function of the system is to convince people that its authority is real and its actions are fair. It has the power of the state, but it still needs most people to obey it willingly in order for it to function.

Crazy judgments happen because they give the impression of impartiality. An accused murderer with $10 to his name gets held on a $1 million bond. What's the point, why not just hold them without bail? Because the rules say you do it this way and shrugging and saying "it doesn't actually matter so who cares?" doesn't make people feel like the system has the proper attitude.

also treaties I imagine?

Well, Denmark would have been the one to agree.

Here's a question- and while I admit it is quite extreme- I've wondered this for quite some time- do please tell me why I'm wrong, because I feel as if I've started believing this more and more:

Could 5% of humanity be a psycho-path-subspecies?

These psychopaths are basically leeches on the rest of us, maybe even a cancer. Not only do they feel no guilt for enslaving other (wage-slavery), but they are also fine with poisoning the body and the mind (too many to list).

Perhaps they can even identify others with the same causal DNA segments. Sight? Smell? Micro-movements? Perhaps they really do see all non psycho-path-bearing-DNA-offspring as worms. Perhaps they intentionally breed with each other to avoid spreading the gene to vasts numbers of people.

Could this explain the vast majority of suffering?

At this point they might finally make an onion v3 domain. Not sure why they haven't done this yet.

You get censorship resistance and it also doesn't leave a trail that leads to your location or requires payment methods. All of which leads to deanonymization.

The main way that an adversary would identify the location of an onion site would be to shut off the power/internet in various locations. That would be an unlikely step against some book piracy, imo.

It might be simpler/faster to get US based transit providers to block the Russian ASN

I would imagine that implications of that would be big, it won't be swift, it will be very slow and steady, but big. See GPS for reference.

there is no confirmed origin for the archivist but only speculation they might be russian or eastern european?

And then the new links will be added to Wikipedia.

Oh, that's funny. The only ISP that services my current domicile blocks sites all the time in the name of "safety," including several I need to access for my job. I have to use a VPN just to get things done. There's no appeal process or channel, either. Thankfully, I'm a month out from moving somewhere that has actual choice in providers, though I'll probably still use the VPN anyway.

Verizon does block catbox.

Hail hydra

No but it’s fast to spin up a new mirror copy, and slow for the courts to respond

Ms Anna's Great Archive.

Call it the "Trump is Great Archive" and hope nobody wants to upset Emperor Trump by filing a motion to take down the Trump is Great Archive /s

I assume that the repository of books was used as training data, but not by way of the annas-archive domain. Instead, it would make a lot more sense for them to download the whole pile via bittorrent, which has nothing at all to do with the domain. In other words, the legal solution here wouldn't have prevented the problem.

Everyone trained on Anna's Archive.

>now they don't want competitors anymore

"They" aren't a single group. Broadly speaking, publishers are the ones suing anna's archive, and they're involved in suits against AI companies as well. I'm not aware of any efforts by AI companies to take down anna's archive.

So anyone with deep enough pockets can do it.

However, just because you receive a fine does not mean that you "can't" do it. You've already done it, got caught, now a fine. It does not mean that the LLM model has to be tossed out and destroyed with a new version trained up without that data. It just means can't is a very stupid word to imply here.

Were these from the same high-profile publishers?

What was the judgment? Seems that their domains are still active. Why is there a difference in judgment here?

>1) Its okay for pharma companies to provide addictive drugs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackler_family

Yes, with FDA approval. You can dispute whether the approval should be granted in the first place, but that's not at all comparable to some drug dealer slinging fentanyl on some street corner. Not to mention this happened decades ago, before the current wave of corruption in the whitehouse. Finally, isn't the whole point of laws and regulations is that there's vaguely some review? I'd far rather have prospective drug dealers having to go through FDA approval before they can sell their drugs, than have them sell whatever they want, without giving safety or efficacy lip service.

>2) Coke can use cocaine, or coca leaves, but no one else: https://blog.oup.com/2014/03/coke-cocaine-coca-cola-capitali...

Again, with the proper licenses. Believe it or not, you too can buy methamphetamine legally if you have a prescription! It even has a snazzy brand name, desoxyn.

>3) This one is hilarious and an ingenious innovation by current administration -- Ban on CBDC, locking out Fed Govt from providing crypto alternatives

What does this have to do with corporations?

It's wrong to distribute books in PDF or epub containers, but it's fine to distribute them as GGUF?

Because that's what OpenAI is doing with the books they-- again-- illegally acquired. Huge AI companies are the ones pirating media at scale and literally everyone except the AI companies have to bear the consequences of that.

There's no possible way it means anything. You'd only start talking about "style" when you ran out of argument. The next thing is a mention of a random thing they were "reminded" of, but with no particular explanation.

The style of the comment suggests that they have far more sinister motives than mere online discussion, and reminds me of off-brand, leaky adult incontinence wear.