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.
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. Continued 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 impede progress for the rest. Don't fight AI, fight for access to it.