0/ I don't understand the argument that training LLMs using copyrighted material is not within the scope of fair use

In school, society explicitly trains future artists, journalists, musicians, etc by studying prior work

Cofounder, Managing Partner @ Multicoin Capital

2/ those journalists/publications have 0 expectation of me

given these realities, what is the argument that training LLMs constitutes something above and beyond fair use?

1/ One of the most common questions famous artists are asked is "who are your inspo" and everyone happily answers

I read ~300 articles per day as an investor

those articles have collectively enabled me to produce billions in returns for our investors

I have paid $0 in compensation those journalists/publications

using such material for training / "inspo" is one thing, but the extent to which the LLM regurgitates carbon copies of OG content is pretty shady lol

you probably wouldn't copy+paste an article and send it out to LPs. simple citation would go a long way

co-conspirator @ gallery.so • prev coinbase • /gallery /djs /robin • my casts are endorsements, financial advice, and reflect my employer's opinions

I do understand it, though not agree with them I think it should be discussed, clarified and classified.

those are different subjects also , for instance twitter would like you to pay for the access to their data for training (if they sell it at all)  and won't care about AI creations being plagiats or not.