Cuz AI in the hands of a few is harmful (see elon musks grok he likes to tamper with) and I find it reprehensible to train AI on material that u steal and then paywall the result
It just seems odd to me, you know? AI in the hands of the few is harmful, but if they pay license fees, that can be allowed. Copyright infringement is theft, but it is acceptable if the result is shared freely. I don’t really see how that works.
I agree. Generally, I think AI is a net negative in any context or scenario, because of the way the tech is built. The badness of AI is inherent, a priori of any copyright discussion. It’s a garbage creator that lowers the overall quality of any mass-data applications, be it aggregation like search engines or Wikipedia, or entertainment media, like photo search results, videos or books.
Why do you want it to work that way?
Cuz AI in the hands of a few is harmful (see elon musks grok he likes to tamper with) and I find it reprehensible to train AI on material that u steal and then paywall the result
It just seems odd to me, you know? AI in the hands of the few is harmful, but if they pay license fees, that can be allowed. Copyright infringement is theft, but it is acceptable if the result is shared freely. I don’t really see how that works.
The result isn’t shared freely because the owners get to dictate what information AI is allowed to give and under what context.
I agree. Generally, I think AI is a net negative in any context or scenario, because of the way the tech is built. The badness of AI is inherent, a priori of any copyright discussion. It’s a garbage creator that lowers the overall quality of any mass-data applications, be it aggregation like search engines or Wikipedia, or entertainment media, like photo search results, videos or books.