4 ms·

So the year is 2120. We could have tech that allows anyone to generate code and art "effortlessly and unknowingly", but we don't because we don't want to upset

• homarp 4y ago
  >some dead folks from 100 years ago except we are in 2022, the artist died 22 days ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33105773 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33105773 and https://twitter.com/bg_5you/status/1578146498768175105 https://twitter.com/bg_5you/status/1578146498768175105 has "credit plz" so as long as in 2120 the tech is trained on public domain artists and code, it will be ok. But if it is trained copyrighted sources, AND requires its own attributions without actually requiring the copyrighted source attributions and/or its licenses, then you are right, we won't get it. The same way we have SSPL and other licenses in addition to public domain code.
  • spywaregorilla 4y ago
    Or we can rip the band aid off and just get on with having nice things
    • homarp 4y ago
      if you reject copyright (I assume that is what you mean by 'having nice things') it has to work both ways and not the"Disney I love Public Domain but I lobby to extend copyright forever" way, because it suits whatever business model.
      • stale2002 4y ago
        > it has to work both ways Pretty much everyone can down and use the publicly available models. And for those without the hardware, there are cheaply available online services you can use as well. You can use it as much as everyone else. Problem solved.
• 7steps2much 4y ago
  Copyright isn't eternal. Stuff from "a hundred years ago" is no longer protected.