4 ms·

What is what? If you mean distinguishing between AI and humans, it’s exactly what it sounds like. Fair use is a legal construct not a universal truth and subjec

What is what? If you mean distinguishing between AI and humans, it’s exactly what it sounds like. Fair use is a legal construct not a universal truth and subject to change like anything else. Just like how the US Founders writing the 2nd amendment with muskets in mind didn’t foresee full auto assault rifles in the hands of citizens. In hindsight, overly permissive law, all things not equal, hello gun control.

heyoni 3y ago
I think my HN client was bugging out because all your comments were displaying as ** Ignore me
salawat 3y ago
Automatic weapons were in fact in the public consciousness at the time of the founding, and the Gatling Gun existed and was used in the Civil War with no restrictions on who may own one. I dare say, this thought that people so well read they could architect a country were not aware of the State of the Art in weaponry is rather naive.
- Riverheart 3y ago
  If it is naive to disbelieve the founders foresaw a future in which automatic weapons and bullets would be so lightweight, cheap and accessible to civilians that anyone could buy them and go on a rampage by themselves that the State could not suppress without dozens of police and SWAT teams then I am naive. Gatling Guns came well after the Founding, were large, heavy, hand cranked, cost between $1000 to $1500 to purchase and required a four man crew to operate. I don’t feel they can be compared to modern weapons. The Founders were intelligent and capable men but they were not infallible. They knew that too, that’s why Amendments exist.
- version_five 3y ago
  I don't think any of that is relevant. It's obvious they didn't mean that they only wanted citizens to have the right to bear inferior arms and that only the government should get the more advanced or powerful weapons. The entire point is being able to oppose a tyrannical government. I can see an argument over nukes, but this "they didn't imagine assault weapons" is just some kind of gaslighting. They imagined sufficient arms to defend oneself against authority.

heyoni 3y ago

I think my HN client was bugging out because all your comments were displaying as ** Ignore me

salawat 3y ago

Automatic weapons were in fact in the public consciousness at the time of the founding, and the Gatling Gun existed and was used in the Civil War with no restrictions on who may own one. I dare say, this thought that people so well read they could architect a country were not aware of the State of the Art in weaponry is rather naive.

Riverheart 3y ago
If it is naive to disbelieve the founders foresaw a future in which automatic weapons and bullets would be so lightweight, cheap and accessible to civilians that anyone could buy them and go on a rampage by themselves that the State could not suppress without dozens of police and SWAT teams then I am naive. Gatling Guns came well after the Founding, were large, heavy, hand cranked, cost between $1000 to $1500 to purchase and required a four man crew to operate. I don’t feel they can be compared to modern weapons. The Founders were intelligent and capable men but they were not infallible. They knew that too, that’s why Amendments exist.
version_five 3y ago
I don't think any of that is relevant. It's obvious they didn't mean that they only wanted citizens to have the right to bear inferior arms and that only the government should get the more advanced or powerful weapons. The entire point is being able to oppose a tyrannical government. I can see an argument over nukes, but this "they didn't imagine assault weapons" is just some kind of gaslighting. They imagined sufficient arms to defend oneself against authority.