They do exist and OpenAI does in fact need to shut down everything right now. But they aren't going to because the government isn't forcing them to and, like many corporations, they care more about giant piles of money than they do about avoiding causing harm.
The idea that every example of rogue agents from every company that has disclosed this is part of some conspiracy (even though we know that some LLMs are very good at hacking and that LLMs sometimes try to accomplish their tasks in ways that cause problems) is just completely unsupported. "It might be convenient for them in a way, therefore it must be a hoax" just doesn't work as an argument.
There's an "About" link on the top of the page and if you click it it fully explains what they do and for who in the first sentence of the first paragraph.
You're getting a negative response because ignoring that and implying that they're secretly doing sketchy things makes it look like you're doing bad faith criticism
- At least to me, AI writing (especially from Claude) is actively painful to read. It's worse than the average person who has flawed English (or just sucks at writing) because of how verbose and stylistically repetitive it is.
- AI writing is a strong probabilistic signal that what I'm reading is going to be crap in terms of the actual ideas and content too, even if it isn't the case 100% of the time. I just don't want to waste my time on that kind of thing.
When I use it for writing I usually have an idea or thesis to explore already. I typically write it out stream of consciousness. The core idea is mine.
I'm not using LLMs to think for me, instead just edit the writing so it has proper grammar and the run ons are reduced.
Even better for something that has data. You can pull PDFs with encoded tables and extract the data into consistent units to compare. You can have it write code to do it and cross check the outputs. You can do that in a minute. Would take hours without an LLM.
The post specifically proposes royalties for ideas from books, not royalties for the books themselves. You would absolutely still be able to share ideas you learned from the books you pirated in that situation. It'd be insanely draconian if you couldn't.
(Then again, US copyright law often is insanely draconian.)
The idea that every example of rogue agents from every company that has disclosed this is part of some conspiracy (even though we know that some LLMs are very good at hacking and that LLMs sometimes try to accomplish their tasks in ways that cause problems) is just completely unsupported. "It might be convenient for them in a way, therefore it must be a hoax" just doesn't work as an argument.