I don't think training a model with copyrighted data is any kind of gray zone at all.

Running inference against such a model _might_ be infringing.

But I don't see the legal argument that model training would be.

Think of model training as lossy data compression. You provide an input, it produces a compressed artifact, and it can no longer reproduce the original when you uncompress it. It can produce _something_. It cannot reproduce the original.

On slashdot, we all agree that format shifting copyrighted works should be allowed and unrestricted, right?

If there is applicable case law here about how lossy a "reproduction" can be before copyright has something to say about it, that would be relevant. Do you know of any?

I think you're repeating something that feels emotionally valid but in my experience, isn't factually (or legally) accurate.

I have found AI models to be frustratingly _obedient_ of copyright.

I'll be in a situation where I ask a specific question about what a document says, and the AI repeatedly says the work is copyrighted and it can't just tell me what it says _verbatim_, but it can answer specific questions for me in its own words (while telling me to check the original).

Two examples from my life are procedural questions about what Roberts Rules of Order would require in a given situation, and, what ASD STE-100 says about how to name/word things.

The applicable US law would appear to be USC 17 Sec 106 and 107, which on one hand limits derivative works, but on the other, allows fair use for purposes of teaching, scholarship, or research.

(USC references provided by AI, btw. Which I haven't read)

I used to agree with you, and then oddly enough, about 25-30 years ago, I came across this signature on another regular slashdot posters postings:

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

(AI tells me the attribution is "The Red Lily", Anatole France, 1894)

Their latest Flash model goes live tomorrow. Price for cached tokens halved, other prices lowered. Since it outperforms their latest Pro model they will reroute pro requests to it until the pro version launches. It does seem to be a frontier model in every way except price.

About 90% of doctors consume alcohol.

TheMiddleRoad was making a joke about the "cadence" cadence.

For me the visualization of direct collapse black hole formation is that there's still a huge mass of gas falling in, at the boundary of the new black hole nearly dense enough to direct collapse itself. The blowback would compress the inflow over the density edge and you get a whole cloud of black holes.

It's pretty cool that they're seeing where the supermassive black holes come from. The models of what's happening in there must be amazing.

Timeline hopper here, just through the gate from funny laugh lady land. Believe it or not in that line Musk is still the richest man ever over there - richer even - but he's a woke social librul because he knows which side of his bread has butter on it.

Notably, President Harris also prefers rockets that will launch to rockets that will not for some reason.

But don't eat the fish. Just in case.

>[T]he oligopoly seems to be facing the first credible challenge to its capacity discipline...

What an interesting way to describe that. A disciplined way, you might say.

Watching was a thrill ride from beginning to end. Still issues with Booster landing but they will sort it out. The re-entry tiles did great. The satellites did great. Ship did so well they will try for a catch next time, if there's nothing counter in the flight data.

Hardware rich development proves itself again. The next one is built and being fitted out for a launch just a couple months away. Behind it, the factory has begun several more.

It's hard to believe they started building this on a beach in tents, with a flying water tower.

The radiation pressure that prevents the inflow of mass to a black hole has no effect on another black hole.

“Good artists copy, great artists steal” - Pablo Picasso

I believe the classic line between copying and synthesis is taking from three artists or more.

The author is allowed to not give a flying fig about that. Or anything else.

It makes no sense to spend more to tiptoe through costly incremental steps of infrastructure buildout buying stuff you crave to be rid of when you can hop right to the conclusion. Fuel is bad. You use it and then you need more fuel. That's a vulnerability to the fuel supplier, the logistics, the free market for fuel, changing government meddling. Fix it right once without fuel and be done with it for 30 years. It's not like there won't be another problem to solve the next day.