I wasn’t sure that I would like an anthropology for my books – I’m doing it now

A billion dollars This is not what it has been before – but it still focuses the mind. At least when I heard that AI Anthropic has agreed with At least $ 1.5 billion in settlement For writers and publishers whose books have been used to teach the initial version of its large language pattern, Claude. This came after the judge issued a summary that he used the books used by pirates. The proposed agreement – which is still being reviewed by the judge – is reportedly awarded to authors at least $ 3,000 per book. I wrote eight and my wife did not show five people. We’re talking to the bathroom dollars here!

Since this settlement is based on pirate books, it really does not address the important question of whether artificial intelligence companies are good to teach their models on printing works. But it is noteworthy that the real money is involved. Previously, the argument about the right to print about AI was based on legal, ethical and even political hypotheses. Now that everything is becoming real, it’s time to address the basic issue: Since the elite AI depends on the content of the book, is it fair for companies to make a trillion dollar jobs without authors?

Aside from the legal, I have been struggling with this issue. But now that we are moving from the court to the notebook, the movie has fallen from my eyes. I deserve that dollar! Paying authors feels the right thing. Despite powerful forces (including US president Donald Trump), otherwise argue.

Disclaimer of good printing

Before I get farther, let me give up a liability. As I mentioned, I am a writer myself and I want to get the result of this argument or lose. I am also in the Author’s Trade Council, a strong fan for authors and complains about Openai and Microsoft for their work in their training courses. (Since I cover technical companies, I refuse to see the petition with those companies.) Obviously I am talking to myself today.

In the past, I have been a secret council in the council, which I have really torn up to whether companies have the right to teach their models on legal purchased books. The argument that humanity is building a wide range of human knowledge is really resonating with me. When I interviewed the Grimes artist in 2023, he expressed his enthusiasm in this experiment: “Oh, sick, I may live forever!” He said. That was met with me too. Expanding my awareness is widely the great reason I love what I do.

But the incorporation of a book inside a large language model made by a giant company is something else. Keep in mind that books are certainly the most valuable corpse in which an artificial intelligence model can fit. Their length and cohesion are unique teachers of human thought. The topics they cover are very broad and comprehensive. They are much more reliable than social media and provide a deeper understanding of news articles. I would like to say that without a book, big language models will be much weaker.

So one might argue that Openai, Google, Meta, Anthropic and others must do well to access books. Late last month, the Shameful White House dinner was impressed by the CEOs who were affected by Donald Trump with insane amounts that are said to have invested in data centers based in the United States to meet the demands of artificial intelligence calculations. Apple promised $ 600 billion, and Meta said it was in line. Openai is part of a $ 500 billion joint venture called Stargate. Compared to these numbers, that $ 1.5 billion, which anthropology, as part of the settlement, agreed to distribute to authors and publishers as part of the breach of the case.

Unfair use

However, it can be well with those companies. The law of printing allows something called “fair use”, which allows the abuse of books and articles based on several criteria, one of which is “transformational” – that means creating it on the content of the book in an innovative way that does not compete with the original product. The judge in charge of the anthropological violation case has issued the ruling that the use of legal books in education is actually protected by fair use. Determining this is an unpleasant exercise because we deal with the legal courtyards we have been drawn before the Internet – alone AI.

Obviously, there must be a solution based on contemporary conditions. The White House AI Action Plan announced that it will not offer this May. But in his remarks about the plan, Trump took care of the matter. In his view, the authors should not be paid – because it is very difficult to launch a system that will pay them fairly. “It is not expected that when any article, book or anything you’ve read or read, you are going to pay a successful artificial intelligence program,” Trump said. “We appreciate this, but we can’t just do it – because it can’t be done.” (A government source this week told me the “tone” statement is set for formal policy.)