I am one of the authors whom Meta stole (sorry, ‘scraped’) from, by using their books to train Libgen. So I’m biased. But this from @mscaitlinmoran.bsky.social is👌
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Yes, but I’ve paid for the newspaper!
Also there are fair usage rules about this – what % you quote etc.
When a paragraph or two of mine is quoted by The Week, that’s okay. But they pay me/Times a syndication fee when they lift whole/most of a piece
I was being facetious… You clearly didn’t pretend it was yours, or include some of her distinctive phraseology without acknowledgment… because she’d hunt you down and stamp you to bits with those Doc Martens of hers.
Not in position to do anything at moment but do have somewhere between concepts of a plan and a plan to deal with this matter legally but rule of law needs to still kind of sort of exist first. But you are right that no, it’s not okay, not at all.
You know, if we lived in a functioning state you'd think the guy behind the seventy billion dollar dumpster fire, Facebook Metaverse, would never be allowed to make business decisions again.
I am fascinated by the Schrödinger Economics concept. It is interesting how it has eased from being an element of business fraud cases to apparently being a 'accepted' form of business practice, especially if the company is too large to be effectively challenged.
Isn't that always the case. Like tax "avoidance" etc.
Generally the wealthier you are the more influence you have, and/or the more likely you'll be in government defining what is or isn't lawful
Yes, this was brought home last week in the discussions on a wealth tax, that the very wealthiest are very adept at avoidance so the revenue actually raised would be a fraction of the potential and would fall heaviest on those least capable of getting into tax avoidance schemes. The challenge of
noting that practical issue is that it gets transformed into a moral issue. Apparently, because we cannot effectively tax the super- and ultra-wealthy, it is now deemed morally 'wrong' to even try to do so.
Yes, and who largely owns the means of communication - those very wealthy people who it benefits to portray taxing the rich as being morally wrong or self defeating
Please add alt-text when sharing images, so that blind and low-vision people aren't excluded from the conversation. Some context and copy/paste or a brief description are often enough. Checking the "reminder to add alt-text" box in your accessibility settings helps a lot.
I'm one of those authors too. Pandora's box is open and they can't put our stolen work back, but we just have to remember what was at the very bottom of Pandora's Box. That's all we've got.
(Feeling a bit wistful today!)
And, apologies, I’ve not been accurate about Meta’s “theft”.
It’s used Libgen – a Russian website that stole millions of books – to train Llama. Because Meta execs said it was just too “slow” and “expensive” to pay for copyrighted works. 🤷♂️
Analogous to me going to the supermarket, loading the trolley and bypassing the checkout because it’s too slow and expensive.
They are disgusting thieves.
I have been asked *so* many times to help train AI but I won't do it, that's one of the reasons I left Twitter. I used to think AI was v exciting but now that I see how dangerous it is in the wrong hands ... I'm having no part of it, willingly anyway.
"Unreasonably expensive" means they did at least a back-of-an-envelope calculation, realised it was a very large number and hoped the authors wouldn't find out.
Comments
Also there are fair usage rules about this – what % you quote etc.
When a paragraph or two of mine is quoted by The Week, that’s okay. But they pay me/Times a syndication fee when they lift whole/most of a piece
All without my knowledge or permission, of course.
https://chng.it/XrzGR9Npry
Generally the wealthier you are the more influence you have, and/or the more likely you'll be in government defining what is or isn't lawful
Thank you.
Shitheels - for saying how unbelievably wealthy and entitled all these people already are. Ugh
(Feeling a bit wistful today!)
https://www.thetimes.com/article/4ca88b12-99c1-4382-ad33-a86d9eb58884?shareToken=14ffcd5e7907d42bb8d5e455ce340a4d
It’s used Libgen – a Russian website that stole millions of books – to train Llama. Because Meta execs said it was just too “slow” and “expensive” to pay for copyrighted works. 🤷♂️
They are disgusting thieves.
SHUT UP they reply.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/03/search-libgen-data-set/682094/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
I have been asked *so* many times to help train AI but I won't do it, that's one of the reasons I left Twitter. I used to think AI was v exciting but now that I see how dangerous it is in the wrong hands ... I'm having no part of it, willingly anyway.