6 ms·

For my two cents; the goal of our human pursuit is to advance our technologies and systems to the point we can all live carefree lives where the focus of our pu

For my two cents; the goal of our human pursuit is to advance our technologies and systems to the point we can all live carefree lives where the focus of our pursuits is self defined. It is not to "own more rights" to shit. Sorry, but no one actually owns what they create, that's the point of creation. And if you take issue with the term create, that only reinforces my point. We're all influence machines, input and output, the future should not be about preserving some peoples rights to limit our collective advancements over their personal wants. Tough shit.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
lm28469 3y ago
> For my two cents; the goal of our human pursuit is to advance our technologies and systems to the point we can all live carefree lives where the focus of our pursuits is self defined. Our overlords didn't get the memo
samstave 3y ago
I disagree - the human pursuit is artificially, or organically, besting its own pattern recognition wet-ware. If we can off load the mundane (survival) aspect of our pattern recognition engine, then maybe we can use those cycles in lofty pursuits - this is the victorian fallacy. - Break everything down - its all patterns all the way, and how we process them... we are letting AI take on an aspect of ourself (pattern recog ;; tokens;; and prediction) That is, if applied to self-preservation, is the essence of sentience. (I think! therefore, I am, and I will prevent you from making me NOT)
whycome 3y ago
Culture is based on the creation of those that came before. Genres of music are created as people try to mimic styles of those before…one could argue that they “trained themselves on the previous dataset”. No one creates anything in a vacuum. They utilize things that we collectively have contributed. Hell, language and writing is the open source thing that we collectively own that ppl use to create their stuff. The creation came after going to schools that we collectively pay for. And travelling on shared roads. It’s the standing on the shoulders of giants — except its really just stacked people all adding their bits.
- emporas 3y ago
  Also the latin alphabet originated from the Euboean alphabet. Euboia is my home, i live here. My guesstimate is that all latin writers, wouldn't like to pay copyright for their use of our Greek letters in their everyday lives.[1] I mean everyone who writes right now, into this HN thread, owns copyright to someone for the letters, amirite? That someone is me. Anyway, long story short, copyright was always a pretty ridiculous idea, alongside with patents of course, but it is only right now, with programs that can mimic writing style, painting style, speech style etc, that is obvious to everyone. As a side note, there was a Greek private torrent tracker, blue-whitegt, which today would be a serious competitor to American companies like netflix or youtube, but it was shut down because, surprise surprise, there were some copyright issues, despite the site being a really quality service, a paid service of course. Blue-whitegt today would be a 10 billion to 100 billion company, instead all the profits aggregated to American companies. When it comes to copyright, very soon everyone on the planet, will have monetizable torrent seeding. All of these copyright chickens, are coming home to roost! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_Greek_alphabets#Euboean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_Greek_alphabets#Euboea...
munificent 3y ago
> the goal of our human pursuit is to advance our technologies and systems to the point we can all live carefree lives where the focus of our pursuits is self defined. Agreed! > the future should not be about preserving some peoples rights to limit our collective advancements over their personal wants. Systems that don't allow people to extract value from the hard work they put into collective advancement do not seem to lead to collective advancement over time and at scale. Incentives matter. No one's going to spend all day making candy and put it in the "free candy" bowl when that one asshole kid down the street just takes all of the candy out of the bowl every single day. At small scales (i.e. relatively few participants with a relatively high number of interactions between them) then informal systems of reciprocity and reputation are sufficient to disincentivize bad actors. At large scales where many interactions are one-off or anonymous, you need other incentives for good-faith participation. There's a reason you don't need a bouncer when you have a few friends over for drinks, but you do if you open a bar.
- naillo 3y ago
  > Systems that don't allow people to extract value from the hard work they put into collective advancement [...] one's going to spend all day making candy and put it in the "free candy" bowl On the other hand this is what researchers do all day every day. PhDs and professors work for the common good and get barely any pay in return. Maybe the future model in art and music is more like the academic researcher.
  - pschuegr 3y ago
    "Maybe the future model in business and sales is more like the academic researcher" funny how nobody ever suggests that.
    - zztop44 3y ago
      To the contrary, the future of the academic researcher is business and sales.
  - cpill 3y ago
gmd63 3y ago
Most things people do end up being a care of other people. If nobody is beholden to any job or duty, and the machines do everything, who is to say I don't want to make every machine on earth dance in a flash mob? I cannot do that, because it would require other people to halt their use of the machines. Abundance is a false promise and one we should be quick to shoot down lest we surrender our future rights to the ones advertising it. Removing the worth of people in their jobs removes their leverage in the constant resource allocation negotiation in the economy. Given that we just witnessed Elon Musk spend 20,000 average American lifetime earnings worth of wages just to be the new dictator of a social media company, I'm not sure that I want those negotiations to take place only among the giga-rich.
lannisterstark 3y ago
Ah yes, you should be free to rewrite the fictional work I wrote or add one chapter to it and be free to sell it under your name magically implying that you are the author. Screw the original artists, right? Why should they deserve anything. Thankfully your opinion is an extreme opinion and will never come to pass. Tough shit indeed. :) ---- I really like hackernews but recently I've been seeing a plethora of "your rights don't matter, you own nothing" bs spreading around.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- danielheath 3y ago
  I mean... rejecting ownership of information (but not rejecting attribution of work) was a key value of the hacker movement in the 80s, so I'm not susprised it's a popular belief on HN.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  I'm able to do everything in your hypothetical scenario besides illegally copy and redistribute the original content. If it makes me happy to write my name on the cover and pretend I wrote "Robert Frost's Poetry Collection" then so be it. Truly, if I want to say "fuck the original artists" in the comfort of my home or margins of the pages, I can do so. I can even sell that adulterated copy under the First Sale doctrine. > I've been seeing a plethora of "your rights don't matter, you own nothing" bs spreading around. It's not a new sentiment. Plenty of countries worldwide ignore US copyright, if they all got sanctioned then America wouldn't have have electricity. If you author a copy of your content in a digital medium, you should be prepared for that content to be redistributed against your will, infinitely. It's not the nature of humanity, it's the nature of the digital format.
  - lannisterstark 3y ago
    >that content to be redistributed against your will That is fine. >If it makes me happy to write my name on the cover and pretend I wrote "Robert Frost's Poetry Collection" then so be it. You can do whatever you want in your own house. No one is trying to dictate terms of what you do in your own private time in your own domicile. The problem occurs when you try to profit from my work, by pretending you did the work, and selling it to the public pretending to own and create the work which you have not. >I can even sell that adulterated copy under the First Sale doctrine. However, the idea of "You can add a chapter to this, call it your own, and sell it" and I won't legally come after you is absurd. and if the results of said legal pursuit result in you being bankrupt...what was the phrase you used, "then so be it." --- Alternatively, you could write your own fictionalized work and sell it. But that requires more work than copying what I wrote, calling it yours, and selling it, doesn't it?
primitivesuave 3y ago
Creating something (writing a book, recording a song, etc) is a conversion of time (your only finite resource) into something of value (maybe only to you). It also turns out that having a profit motive and IP protection around creating valuable things is a fundamental requirement for having a creative industry to begin with. It's also what drives the free market to determine which creations are even valuable to begin with.
wpietri 3y ago
I might point you to Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution: "[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." They are with you on the advance, and that in the long term science and the useful arts can't be owned. But to achieve that long-term goal, they saw it as valuable to give people temporary rights to align those "personal wants" with "our collective advancements".
ChatGTP 3y ago
This has nothing to do with living a carefree life, this whole AI initiative is so tech companies can extract more money from their products. Don’t want to pay for content ? Well we have “solved that”…

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

lm28469 3y ago

> For my two cents; the goal of our human pursuit is to advance our technologies and systems to the point we can all live carefree lives where the focus of our pursuits is self defined. Our overlords didn't get the memo

samstave 3y ago

I disagree - the human pursuit is artificially, or organically, besting its own pattern recognition wet-ware. If we can off load the mundane (survival) aspect of our pattern recognition engine, then maybe we can use those cycles in lofty pursuits - this is the victorian fallacy. - Break everything down - its all patterns all the way, and how we process them... we are letting AI take on an aspect of ourself (pattern recog ;; tokens;; and prediction) That is, if applied to self-preservation, is the essence of sentience. (I think! therefore, I am, and I will prevent you from making me NOT)

whycome 3y ago

Culture is based on the creation of those that came before. Genres of music are created as people try to mimic styles of those before…one could argue that they “trained themselves on the previous dataset”. No one creates anything in a vacuum. They utilize things that we collectively have contributed. Hell, language and writing is the open source thing that we collectively own that ppl use to create their stuff. The creation came after going to schools that we collectively pay for. And travelling on shared roads. It’s the standing on the shoulders of giants — except its really just stacked people all adding their bits.

emporas 3y ago
Also the latin alphabet originated from the Euboean alphabet. Euboia is my home, i live here. My guesstimate is that all latin writers, wouldn't like to pay copyright for their use of our Greek letters in their everyday lives.[1] I mean everyone who writes right now, into this HN thread, owns copyright to someone for the letters, amirite? That someone is me. Anyway, long story short, copyright was always a pretty ridiculous idea, alongside with patents of course, but it is only right now, with programs that can mimic writing style, painting style, speech style etc, that is obvious to everyone. As a side note, there was a Greek private torrent tracker, blue-whitegt, which today would be a serious competitor to American companies like netflix or youtube, but it was shut down because, surprise surprise, there were some copyright issues, despite the site being a really quality service, a paid service of course. Blue-whitegt today would be a 10 billion to 100 billion company, instead all the profits aggregated to American companies. When it comes to copyright, very soon everyone on the planet, will have monetizable torrent seeding. All of these copyright chickens, are coming home to roost! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_Greek_alphabets#Euboean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaic_Greek_alphabets#Euboea...

munificent 3y ago

> the goal of our human pursuit is to advance our technologies and systems to the point we can all live carefree lives where the focus of our pursuits is self defined. Agreed! > the future should not be about preserving some peoples rights to limit our collective advancements over their personal wants. Systems that don't allow people to extract value from the hard work they put into collective advancement do not seem to lead to collective advancement over time and at scale. Incentives matter. No one's going to spend all day making candy and put it in the "free candy" bowl when that one asshole kid down the street just takes all of the candy out of the bowl every single day. At small scales (i.e. relatively few participants with a relatively high number of interactions between them) then informal systems of reciprocity and reputation are sufficient to disincentivize bad actors. At large scales where many interactions are one-off or anonymous, you need other incentives for good-faith participation. There's a reason you don't need a bouncer when you have a few friends over for drinks, but you do if you open a bar.

naillo 3y ago
> Systems that don't allow people to extract value from the hard work they put into collective advancement [...] one's going to spend all day making candy and put it in the "free candy" bowl On the other hand this is what researchers do all day every day. PhDs and professors work for the common good and get barely any pay in return. Maybe the future model in art and music is more like the academic researcher.
- pschuegr 3y ago
  "Maybe the future model in business and sales is more like the academic researcher" funny how nobody ever suggests that.
  - zztop44 3y ago
    To the contrary, the future of the academic researcher is business and sales.
- cpill 3y ago

gmd63 3y ago

Most things people do end up being a care of other people. If nobody is beholden to any job or duty, and the machines do everything, who is to say I don't want to make every machine on earth dance in a flash mob? I cannot do that, because it would require other people to halt their use of the machines. Abundance is a false promise and one we should be quick to shoot down lest we surrender our future rights to the ones advertising it. Removing the worth of people in their jobs removes their leverage in the constant resource allocation negotiation in the economy. Given that we just witnessed Elon Musk spend 20,000 average American lifetime earnings worth of wages just to be the new dictator of a social media company, I'm not sure that I want those negotiations to take place only among the giga-rich.

lannisterstark 3y ago

Ah yes, you should be free to rewrite the fictional work I wrote or add one chapter to it and be free to sell it under your name magically implying that you are the author. Screw the original artists, right? Why should they deserve anything. Thankfully your opinion is an extreme opinion and will never come to pass. Tough shit indeed. :) ---- I really like hackernews but recently I've been seeing a plethora of "your rights don't matter, you own nothing" bs spreading around.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
danielheath 3y ago
I mean... rejecting ownership of information (but not rejecting attribution of work) was a key value of the hacker movement in the 80s, so I'm not susprised it's a popular belief on HN.
smoldesu 3y ago
I'm able to do everything in your hypothetical scenario besides illegally copy and redistribute the original content. If it makes me happy to write my name on the cover and pretend I wrote "Robert Frost's Poetry Collection" then so be it. Truly, if I want to say "fuck the original artists" in the comfort of my home or margins of the pages, I can do so. I can even sell that adulterated copy under the First Sale doctrine. > I've been seeing a plethora of "your rights don't matter, you own nothing" bs spreading around. It's not a new sentiment. Plenty of countries worldwide ignore US copyright, if they all got sanctioned then America wouldn't have have electricity. If you author a copy of your content in a digital medium, you should be prepared for that content to be redistributed against your will, infinitely. It's not the nature of humanity, it's the nature of the digital format.
- lannisterstark 3y ago
  >that content to be redistributed against your will That is fine. >If it makes me happy to write my name on the cover and pretend I wrote "Robert Frost's Poetry Collection" then so be it. You can do whatever you want in your own house. No one is trying to dictate terms of what you do in your own private time in your own domicile. The problem occurs when you try to profit from my work, by pretending you did the work, and selling it to the public pretending to own and create the work which you have not. >I can even sell that adulterated copy under the First Sale doctrine. However, the idea of "You can add a chapter to this, call it your own, and sell it" and I won't legally come after you is absurd. and if the results of said legal pursuit result in you being bankrupt...what was the phrase you used, "then so be it." --- Alternatively, you could write your own fictionalized work and sell it. But that requires more work than copying what I wrote, calling it yours, and selling it, doesn't it?

primitivesuave 3y ago

Creating something (writing a book, recording a song, etc) is a conversion of time (your only finite resource) into something of value (maybe only to you). It also turns out that having a profit motive and IP protection around creating valuable things is a fundamental requirement for having a creative industry to begin with. It's also what drives the free market to determine which creations are even valuable to begin with.

wpietri 3y ago

I might point you to Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution: "[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." They are with you on the advance, and that in the long term science and the useful arts can't be owned. But to achieve that long-term goal, they saw it as valuable to give people temporary rights to align those "personal wants" with "our collective advancements".

ChatGTP 3y ago

This has nothing to do with living a carefree life, this whole AI initiative is so tech companies can extract more money from their products. Don’t want to pay for content ? Well we have “solved that”…