Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I did in fact read the article. The author isn’t concerned about the book project. The author wants to use it as a springboard for complaining about AI fear, and his argument fundamentally hinges on the claim that AI training is fair use. He’s claiming the book project is comparable to AI training.

I think the book project has a better claim to fair use than AI training does, although excerpting entire pages is maybe too far (but the word highlighting does feel like commentary).



If I read the book, take notes about the number of times $x happened and later post them to my website, are you fine with that?

if I automate that process with a script that uses regular expressions, are you fine with that?

if I add a neural network to my script and it spits out the same numbers, are you still fine with that?

hopefully you see the madness in your argument.


I’m thinking specifically of generative AI’s fair use claims. I thought the book site (and all of your extension examples) was clearly fair use.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: