[evenhash]

> Nobody is saying we’re going to make the original content inaccessible through the previous means after the LLMs are trained on it.

Is that not why they’re shredding the books when they’re done with them?

[b112]

How is this a fair and reasonable assessment?

From here:

https://x.com/HedgieMarkets/status/2081534588485296565

A quote:

A federal judge ruled the practice is fair use because eliminating the original means only one copy exists at a time.

So no, the reason isn't to keep that information, even from competitors. It's about a legal ruling, which allows them to scan said books without infringing copyright. Judicial decisions and case law have lead to this outcome.

Please stop spreading rumours without any validity.

[master-lincoln]

They asked a question. I saw no rumor spread.

Gotta love that ridiculous case law system :D

[b112]

Well, sometimes a ? is rhetorical, and meant as a statement and not a question. But fair enough. And yes, I do believe the outcome is silly here.