[insanitybit]

I have no clue what you're talking about tbh. I can use a lossy compression algorithm that is definitionally holding less information than the original while still be subject to the copyright of the original. This is just obviously true, converting a PNG to a JPEG does not invalidate the copyright on the PNG. You can also produce an imagine using a lossy compression algorithm that is not subject to the copyright of the original, I haven't said that that's not true.

Regardless, the argument that LLM output is or is not subject to copyright based on information theory is entirely defeated by what I've said.

[flir]

> I have no clue what you're talking about tbh.

Point an LLM at the conversation and ask it to ELI5 the competing arguments.

[satvikpendem]

Indeed, not sure how this person above can't comprehend any competing arguments and seem to say they "don't understand" over and over again.

[insanitybit]

Why? I'm very obviously right. Entropy has nothing to do with copyright. Any LLM will answer the same.

[satvikpendem]

Read their example again if you have no idea what they're talking about. Nothing you said defeats the fact that LLMs do not do compression.

[insanitybit]

Nothing about entropy is related to copyright.