rise_before_sun

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by rise_before_sun 1y ago

   Thanks for this info. I was looking for which pirated books were used for which model. Ethically speaking, if Anthropic (a) did later purchase every book it pirated or (b) compensated every author whose book was pirated, would it absolve an
2. 2.▲
   by rise_before_sun 1y ago

   The following document indicates otherwise. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.43... . "Similarly, different sets or “subsets” or “parts of” or “portions” of the collections sourced from Book
3. 3.▲
   by rise_before_sun 1y ago

   Thanks for the link. Among several places where judge mentions Anthropic buying legit copies of books it pirated, probably this sentence is most relevant: "That Anthropic later bought a copy of a book it earlier stole off the internet
4. 4.▲
   by rise_before_sun 1y ago

   Where can I find source that says Anthropic bought the pirated books afterwards? I haven't seen this in any official document. Also, do we know if the newer models were trained without the pirated books?
5. 5.▲
   by rise_before_sun 1y ago

   Does anyone know which models were trained on the pirated books? I would like to avoid using those models.
6. 6.▲
   by rise_before_sun 1y ago

   It seems weird that there was legal culpability for downloading pirated books but not for training on them. At the very least, there is a transitive dependency between the two acts. Other people have said that Anthropic bought the books lat