[globular-toast]

No "avid reader" could recall anywhere near that much text. That takes dedicated effort to commit to memory. Copyright was never meant to stop people copying books anyway, it was meant to stop machines (ie. printing presses) copying them.

Edit: Apologies, I misread it as "100 pages". My point about copyright still stands, though.

[FeepingCreature]

I disagree that avid readers cannot complete entire passages from books they've read several times when fed a prefix.

[leni536]

And can these avid readers publish these recited passages without infringing copyright?

[FeepingCreature]

I mean, the debate would then turn on whether publishing the passages and publishing the model is the same sort of thing. I think there's mainly two views: "we know the passages are in there, so publishing the model is publishing the passages is copyright violation", and "nothing happens until you go through considerable effort to elicit the passages, so the user is committing copyright violation using the model as a tool."

Personally I think our legal system is just not set up for a world where we can download mindstates in numeric form. Would a sufficiently detailed recording of my brain violate copyright? If simulated, it could certainly be elicited to commit violations.

edit: At any rate, Anthropic are not publishing the Sonnet 3.7 weights.

[JAlexoid]

I used to use the initial letters of a whole paragraph from Lord of The Rings as my password.

Some of us have a good enough memory.