4 ms·

So much rent seeking. It's the equivalent of becoming famous and suddenly everyone wants to be your friend. There's not really a way around it, it's going to be

So much rent seeking. It's the equivalent of becoming famous and suddenly everyone wants to be your friend. There's not really a way around it, it's going to be en vogue for a while, but it should be called out, lest more people really think they're owed something.

ChatGTP 3y ago
Do you have any constructive refutations to the ideas presented in the article or just wanted to to use the term “rent seeking” as its in vogue right now ?
- pixl97 3y ago
  Society is built on copying. Nearly everything humanity does, all of our culture, all of our memes, our language, or alphabet, or behaviors are copied from other people. Every single one of these ideas I've heard on pay for data on AI could be turned around and used on corporations, and if so, individuals in the US. I've not seen one yet that would not reverse the situation and turn in to a corporation buying up as much IP as possible and turning into, yes, rent seeking. If some company makes a zillion dollars with AI then tax the living shit out of them and distribute the gains as UBI. If the future is going to AGI the idea that humans will have enough interesting to come up with to actually support themselves seems like a very unlikely premise anyway.
  - courgette 3y ago
    Yes fully agreed. The scale and cadence of it seems to be different. Also, once again Karl ideas of “ownership of the means of copying and training” seems like it will be relevant. I have nothing cleaver to say; I agree with you. Just wanted to add some colors. I find it sad that IP laws can be enforced ruthlessly in a case. And fully ignored in another. Actually, musing; I have something to say: We could force AI manufacturers to reveal what the data underlying the training; and use IP at that stage to effect some repartitions. Raws BOM-style list of training data should not reveal their secret sauce? ( actually question )
  - barrysteve 3y ago
    No it is not. The English alphabet is not the Phonecian alphabet. That is an undeniable fact. Building on something doesn't make it a copy. You blur the relations between words. It is unwise.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
klyrs 3y ago
Is OpenAI not rent-seeking when they repackage my work and sell it?
- pixl97 3y ago
  You seem to misunderstand the term rentseeking. If I incur a cost an expense running a service it is not rent seeking, that's just paying for a service. Now if that violates copyright that's a different law altogether. Now if you paint something once and you want to have a monopoly from everyone event thinking about it for 100 years, we'll, that is rentseeking behavior.
- echelon 3y ago
  Do you expect me to pay you for reading the words you just wrote? Does most people's dormant project code on GitHub have any value before enriched and incorporated into an ML model? The marginal cost of an idea is zero, and the world is turning into pure thought.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
CatWChainsaw 3y ago
Catabolic capitalism is the future and pearl clutching can't and won't stop the feast. Indulge.

ChatGTP 3y ago

Do you have any constructive refutations to the ideas presented in the article or just wanted to to use the term “rent seeking” as its in vogue right now ?

pixl97 3y ago
Society is built on copying. Nearly everything humanity does, all of our culture, all of our memes, our language, or alphabet, or behaviors are copied from other people. Every single one of these ideas I've heard on pay for data on AI could be turned around and used on corporations, and if so, individuals in the US. I've not seen one yet that would not reverse the situation and turn in to a corporation buying up as much IP as possible and turning into, yes, rent seeking. If some company makes a zillion dollars with AI then tax the living shit out of them and distribute the gains as UBI. If the future is going to AGI the idea that humans will have enough interesting to come up with to actually support themselves seems like a very unlikely premise anyway.
- courgette 3y ago
  Yes fully agreed. The scale and cadence of it seems to be different. Also, once again Karl ideas of “ownership of the means of copying and training” seems like it will be relevant. I have nothing cleaver to say; I agree with you. Just wanted to add some colors. I find it sad that IP laws can be enforced ruthlessly in a case. And fully ignored in another. Actually, musing; I have something to say: We could force AI manufacturers to reveal what the data underlying the training; and use IP at that stage to effect some repartitions. Raws BOM-style list of training data should not reveal their secret sauce? ( actually question )
- barrysteve 3y ago
  No it is not. The English alphabet is not the Phonecian alphabet. That is an undeniable fact. Building on something doesn't make it a copy. You blur the relations between words. It is unwise.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

klyrs 3y ago

Is OpenAI not rent-seeking when they repackage my work and sell it?

pixl97 3y ago
You seem to misunderstand the term rentseeking. If I incur a cost an expense running a service it is not rent seeking, that's just paying for a service. Now if that violates copyright that's a different law altogether. Now if you paint something once and you want to have a monopoly from everyone event thinking about it for 100 years, we'll, that is rentseeking behavior.
echelon 3y ago
Do you expect me to pay you for reading the words you just wrote? Does most people's dormant project code on GitHub have any value before enriched and incorporated into an ML model? The marginal cost of an idea is zero, and the world is turning into pure thought.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

CatWChainsaw 3y ago

Catabolic capitalism is the future and pearl clutching can't and won't stop the feast. Indulge.