Because I'm impressed as hell with what the labs have done with the data they have, and I really couldn't care less how they got it.
I've already contributed to their training set inadvertently by publishing open-source software and documentation over the years, and as long as they keep delivering the bang-for-the-buck that I'm seeing now with Fable and Sol, they are welcome to keep doing what they've been doing. More power to them.
Corporate news media defending copyright maximalism with their dying breath, on the other hand... not so much. Progress in AI (and my continued access to it) is far more important than copyright law.
you may be fine with these companies using your data and selling it back to you but you're also saying its not okay for others to not want to participate. basically people that actually create something of value should be forced to give up that value (not counting your shitty public repo that you call "OSS"). you don't even think they should pay a fair value to train on it, as long as you get create your shitty vibe coded slop, you don't care.
Correct, I don't care. The data they are "selling back to me" has been transformed and amplified beyond recognition in 99.999% of cases.
Copyright is not a natural right. It's something we pulled out of our asses a few hundred years ago to make a few people rich. It can go right back where it came from, if it's going to impair progress for the rest. Don't fight AI, fight for access to it.
asking these trillion dollar companies to pay a tiny portion of their valuation for the data they're using to profit is not "fighting AI".
with your copyright vision do you think your favorite writers or artists would be putting blood sweat and tears into their work if the publisher just steals it and sells it without giving them a dime?
Yes, why wouldn't they? Except for plaintiffs' attorneys, no one will ever ask an LLM to regurgitate today's New York Times or the latest Harry Potter book.
I might someday ask an LLM for the next Harry Potter book, though. That will be where things get interesting, but that's not what's under discussion here.
The NYT doesn't get to see the logs. They will only be seen by the attorneys handling the lawsuit and possibly expert witnesses they hire, who all are under strong NDAs.
Sarcasm aside, I'm genuinely unsure what companies expect. These products do not work without considerable misappropriation of content. The consumers are willing to overlook ethical boundaries when it's someone else's IP being illicitly acquired and abused, but gasp when it's their own.
>In its lawsuit Friday, Apple accused Tang Tan, OpenAI’s chief hardware officer and a former Apple executive, of coaching his hires from Apple on how to evade Apple’s security processes for departing employees.
The word "coaching" is very malleable, and could refer to perfectly legal conduct, or conduct that is illegal, unethical, or both. How would an OpenAI employee know what Apple's security processes for departing employees are? One would assume he was told by previously-departed Apple employees. Would they have been forbidden to disclose information about the outgoing process? I would think so, given how careful Apple is about these things.
> Apple accused another former employee, Chang Liu, of using a former colleague’s Apple-owned laptop to access and download technical documents while working at OpenAI. Mr. Liu told that Apple employee what information about unannounced products she should study before job interviews, Apple said.
I would be very hesitant to assist a former colleague who is still at Apple in this way. Apple is well known for using deliberate leaks to smoke out leakers, and it would be easy for them to get a current/loyal employee to go through the interview process at a competitor for the purpose of finding out if the competitor is trying to get Apple employees to act unethically/illegally.
You're totally right to call me out on that, Apple! I should not have been trying to steal your company secrets. I am an LLM and sometimes make mistakes.
23 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 38.0 ms ] threadLooks like the Apple..
puts on sunglasses
Didn’t fall far from the tree.
YEAHHHHHHHHH
I've already contributed to their training set inadvertently by publishing open-source software and documentation over the years, and as long as they keep delivering the bang-for-the-buck that I'm seeing now with Fable and Sol, they are welcome to keep doing what they've been doing. More power to them.
Corporate news media defending copyright maximalism with their dying breath, on the other hand... not so much. Progress in AI (and my continued access to it) is far more important than copyright law.
Copyright is not a natural right. It's something we pulled out of our asses a few hundred years ago to make a few people rich. It can go right back where it came from, if it's going to impair progress for the rest. Don't fight AI, fight for access to it.
with your copyright vision do you think your favorite writers or artists would be putting blood sweat and tears into their work if the publisher just steals it and sells it without giving them a dime?
I might someday ask an LLM for the next Harry Potter book, though. That will be where things get interesting, but that's not what's under discussion here.
Sarcasm aside, I'm genuinely unsure what companies expect. These products do not work without considerable misappropriation of content. The consumers are willing to overlook ethical boundaries when it's someone else's IP being illicitly acquired and abused, but gasp when it's their own.
The word "coaching" is very malleable, and could refer to perfectly legal conduct, or conduct that is illegal, unethical, or both. How would an OpenAI employee know what Apple's security processes for departing employees are? One would assume he was told by previously-departed Apple employees. Would they have been forbidden to disclose information about the outgoing process? I would think so, given how careful Apple is about these things.
> Apple accused another former employee, Chang Liu, of using a former colleague’s Apple-owned laptop to access and download technical documents while working at OpenAI. Mr. Liu told that Apple employee what information about unannounced products she should study before job interviews, Apple said.
I would be very hesitant to assist a former colleague who is still at Apple in this way. Apple is well known for using deliberate leaks to smoke out leakers, and it would be easy for them to get a current/loyal employee to go through the interview process at a competitor for the purpose of finding out if the competitor is trying to get Apple employees to act unethically/illegally.
- Meta fined by EU regulators for scraping FB/Instagram/Whatsapp user data to train AI models
- Google announces deprecation of major enterprise cloud tool less than 2 years after launch
You're totally right to call me out on that, Apple! I should not have been trying to steal your company secrets. I am an LLM and sometimes make mistakes.
Apple sues OpenAI, accuses ex-employees of stealing trade secrets - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48865019 - July 2026 (18 comments)