> Their idea is that you pay a fee to access any information that was freely available. An LLM containing the information doesn’t take away from the book being

> Their idea is that you pay a fee to access any information that was freely available. An LLM containing the information doesn’t take away from the book being available at the library. It’s an additional way to access the information. A company charging a fee for it doesn’t stop you from going to the library if you want to. > Your idea is tearing down of fences, their idea is gatekeeping. The two ideas are incompatible. You act like the parent commenter is permanently stealing the book from the library and gifting it to a private training set. Information being available from more places, even if some are paid, doesn’t mean gatekeeping. There are also open weight LLMs that can be run locally. Some of these are being fine tuned for specific topics against topical datasets which is opening up even more interesting opportunities (this is exactly what the linked article is about)