I didn’t ask for info, I asked for your views. I gave you all the info anyone has publicly, so you have enough to comment.
I suspect that it was a limited hangout self-own by Meta to claim that they aren’t responsible, and then they are doing research on a leaked LLM that they developed, but then was leaked, so they can claim that the subsequent research is not tainted by the fruit of the poisonous tree legal doctrine. Or, their torrent client or other software on the same machine had 0-days and they got hacked by someone on the Books3 swarm or knowledgeable of what IPs were connecting to it.
I appreciate your posts and I am replying to you to humbly ask you to post more. :P
I'm not really sure what you are insinuating? You think Meta leaked LAMA so they could claim, legally that they are in the clear for copyright violation? Sorry, I just don't really get what you want me to opine about.
If that is what you are asking, I don't think that's what happened. It's far more likely that it was just leaked or grabbed by a hacker
I just thought the whole situation was interesting. You commented about the current LLM research being clean, while being based on prior LLMs which were perhaps less clean, so I thought that it was a curious coincidence how torrents kept popping up.
I suspect that it was a limited hangout self-own by Meta to claim that they aren’t responsible, and then they are doing research on a leaked LLM that they developed, but then was leaked, so they can claim that the subsequent research is not tainted by the fruit of the poisonous tree legal doctrine. Or, their torrent client or other software on the same machine had 0-days and they got hacked by someone on the Books3 swarm or knowledgeable of what IPs were connecting to it.
I appreciate your posts and I am replying to you to humbly ask you to post more. :P