> From that point, an LLM, which remembers everything verbatim and mixing them together is arguably making plagiarism from many sources to create their own work

> From that point, an LLM, which remembers everything verbatim and mixing them together is arguably making plagiarism from many sources to create their own works, while being unable to cite them accurately. A very useful property, indeed. I think this is a weak point in your argument. I support the rest of your reasoning, but this point can be attacked. For plagiarism to exist, the original work has to be easily detectable by a human. We've seen this sometimes be the case (see NYT lawsuit), but often times, the line is blurry (see Ed Sheeran lawsuit [0]). There's a reasonable argument to make that the combination of existing ideas by an AI creates something novel. It's what arguably what artists do, too. There's even a famous book called "Steal like an artist" [1]. As such, some output by AI can be plagiarism, but the very way modern AI works may not automatically mean everything is plagiarism. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcCKlsTgjeM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcCKlsTgjeM [1]: https://austinkleon.com/steal/ https://austinkleon.com/steal/