4 ms·

> This would lead to a win win setup. Artists, developers, writers, lawyers and so on would need compensation for training content - one time or ongoing - leadi

> This would lead to a win win setup. Artists, developers, writers, lawyers and so on would need compensation for training content - one time or ongoing - leading to higher quality models, job growth and a superior ai product over all. I have been told information should be free, though.

gumballindie 3y ago
According to terms and conditions. Ip is not information, it’s work. Pay for it or dont use it. I decide the terms of my own output not you, and certainly not a corporation that resells it and threatens me with unemployment.
- endisneigh 3y ago
  I don't disagree with you, but many people on HN think digital information should be free, just sayin'
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- andybak 3y ago
  > I decide the terms of my own output not you, and certainly not a corporation that resells it and threatens me with unemployment. Actually - the government decides the terms of your output by passing laws. Your legal right to your content is that which the law allows. If copyright legislation was revoked tomorrow you'd be howling into the void.
  - gumballindie 3y ago
    What kind of tyranny would allow a handful of corporations to grab my work for free and resell it while making me unemployed? I do want as a citizen to have my work protected, and i equally want that corporations to benefit from it and compensate me if so i wish. Anti copyright is a bit like communism. What’s the plan? That we all live in one happy commune while the politburo owns everything and we starve in the name of glorious progress? We tried it before and it didnt work.
    - andybak 3y ago
      I'm not anti-copyright as much as "anti-assuming-more-copyright-is-an-unalloyed-good". > What kind of tyranny would allow a handful of corporations to grab my work for free and resell it while making me unemployed? Again - a presumption that AI will be owned by big tech - it's already out there and runs on your home PC. And it can't be taken back.

gumballindie 3y ago

According to terms and conditions. Ip is not information, it’s work. Pay for it or dont use it. I decide the terms of my own output not you, and certainly not a corporation that resells it and threatens me with unemployment.

endisneigh 3y ago
I don't disagree with you, but many people on HN think digital information should be free, just sayin'
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
andybak 3y ago
> I decide the terms of my own output not you, and certainly not a corporation that resells it and threatens me with unemployment. Actually - the government decides the terms of your output by passing laws. Your legal right to your content is that which the law allows. If copyright legislation was revoked tomorrow you'd be howling into the void.
- gumballindie 3y ago
  What kind of tyranny would allow a handful of corporations to grab my work for free and resell it while making me unemployed? I do want as a citizen to have my work protected, and i equally want that corporations to benefit from it and compensate me if so i wish. Anti copyright is a bit like communism. What’s the plan? That we all live in one happy commune while the politburo owns everything and we starve in the name of glorious progress? We tried it before and it didnt work.
  - andybak 3y ago
    I'm not anti-copyright as much as "anti-assuming-more-copyright-is-an-unalloyed-good". > What kind of tyranny would allow a handful of corporations to grab my work for free and resell it while making me unemployed? Again - a presumption that AI will be owned by big tech - it's already out there and runs on your home PC. And it can't be taken back.