4 ms·
To be fair, consider the human brain as purely a neural network that trains on any and all artwork it encounters over its lifetime. It then produces a piece of
by Thorentis 4y ago
To be fair, consider the human brain as purely a neural network that trains on any and all artwork it encounters over its lifetime. It then produces a piece of artwork. Is it wrong for that brain to charge for copies of the artwork?
I find it quite amusing that there seems to be overlap between people who think IP/copyright law needs an overhaul, and people who think that Github Code Pilot and DallE are exploitive.
- mejutoco 4y agoThose two opinions are orthogonal. One might believe that Mickey Mouse should not dictate copyright law and think these tools are exploitative. I use them, I do not think they are evil. I can also appreciate the asymmetry of using code with restrictive licenses or private to train an ML vs the consumer visibility over, for instance, windows source code. In the case of DallE I find it fascinating and useful, and can likewise appreciate the asymmetry of having the compute power and placing restrictions on which prompts are allowed, It is not difficult to see how those asymmetries can be seen as exploitative. I don’t have a side but the thought is easy to entertain. Edit: grammar