3 ms·

All analogies are fraught but this one takes the cake. A more apt one is not wanting the Jaquard loom people to steal my designs.

ben_w 3y ago
It was difficult for me to find even this half-baked[0] analogy, given we've never had AI before. The point I was aiming for is that even if your stuff isn't ever stolen (regardless of what exactly you mean by that), you're still going to be out of a job because the automaton is good enough to out-compete you economically. At least, that's my expectation, though I hope not for a few more years at least. [0] yes that pun was deliberate
- gumballindie 3y ago
  I am not worried about job losses, not that it would be easy to achieve by current ai, nor am i against ai. I am against corporations taking what doesnt belong to them and using it against us. Technically speaking if ai would be as capable as you think it would mean that we wouldnt need said corporations since ai can provide all the services they do - otherwise it would be illogical and contradictory to claim ai can do everything under the sun. My beef is with the oligarchy thats eroding our freedoms, privacy, and ownership. You should be too because our democracy and way of life is threatened by them. Ai is just another tool they want to monopolise.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    If the generative AI isn't good enough to take jobs, then the corporations can't use what they've taken against anyone in creative roles. (The personal profile/ad tracking/face tracking AI probably still could be used against people, but that doesn't seem to be part of this thread? Correct me if I'm wrong). > Technically speaking if ai would be as capable as you think it would mean that we wouldnt need said corporations since ai can provide all the services they do - otherwise it would be illogical and contradictory to claim ai can do everything under the sun. That requires all economic tasks to be simultaneously equally susceptible to AI. So far, not so, though this is certainly the goal. > Ai is just another tool they want to monopolise. Can you name a single thing that would go less badly, in the event that all the AI were made public domain?
gumballindie 3y ago
Except its not designs being stolen but rather products. Also stealing designs is not allowed in modern times since you know we evolved.
- ben_w 3y ago
  First, LLMs and Diffusion models infer a design from a product or other permanent artefact. They're not designed to, nor good at, literal copying. Second, our species didn't evolve into being in 1787: """ The Calico Printers’ Act 1787[19] was the first statute to explicitly provide protection for designs, conferring rights enduring for 2 months upon: “Every person who shall invent, design and print or cause to be invented, designed and printed and become the proprietors of any new and original pattern or patterns for printing linens, cottons, calicos or muslins…” … [19] The full title of the Calico Printers’ Act 1787 was “An Act for encouragement of the Arts of Designing and Printing Linens, Cottons, Calicos and Muslins by vesting the properties thereof in the Designers, Printers and Proprietors for a limited time”. """ - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7d90b2e5274a6b89a50d21/ipresearch-designlaw-201207.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7d90b2e5274...

ben_w 3y ago

It was difficult for me to find even this half-baked[0] analogy, given we've never had AI before. The point I was aiming for is that even if your stuff isn't ever stolen (regardless of what exactly you mean by that), you're still going to be out of a job because the automaton is good enough to out-compete you economically. At least, that's my expectation, though I hope not for a few more years at least. [0] yes that pun was deliberate

gumballindie 3y ago
I am not worried about job losses, not that it would be easy to achieve by current ai, nor am i against ai. I am against corporations taking what doesnt belong to them and using it against us. Technically speaking if ai would be as capable as you think it would mean that we wouldnt need said corporations since ai can provide all the services they do - otherwise it would be illogical and contradictory to claim ai can do everything under the sun. My beef is with the oligarchy thats eroding our freedoms, privacy, and ownership. You should be too because our democracy and way of life is threatened by them. Ai is just another tool they want to monopolise.
- ben_w 3y ago
  If the generative AI isn't good enough to take jobs, then the corporations can't use what they've taken against anyone in creative roles. (The personal profile/ad tracking/face tracking AI probably still could be used against people, but that doesn't seem to be part of this thread? Correct me if I'm wrong). > Technically speaking if ai would be as capable as you think it would mean that we wouldnt need said corporations since ai can provide all the services they do - otherwise it would be illogical and contradictory to claim ai can do everything under the sun. That requires all economic tasks to be simultaneously equally susceptible to AI. So far, not so, though this is certainly the goal. > Ai is just another tool they want to monopolise. Can you name a single thing that would go less badly, in the event that all the AI were made public domain?

gumballindie 3y ago

Except its not designs being stolen but rather products. Also stealing designs is not allowed in modern times since you know we evolved.

ben_w 3y ago
First, LLMs and Diffusion models infer a design from a product or other permanent artefact. They're not designed to, nor good at, literal copying. Second, our species didn't evolve into being in 1787: """ The Calico Printers’ Act 1787[19] was the first statute to explicitly provide protection for designs, conferring rights enduring for 2 months upon: “Every person who shall invent, design and print or cause to be invented, designed and printed and become the proprietors of any new and original pattern or patterns for printing linens, cottons, calicos or muslins…” … [19] The full title of the Calico Printers’ Act 1787 was “An Act for encouragement of the Arts of Designing and Printing Linens, Cottons, Calicos and Muslins by vesting the properties thereof in the Designers, Printers and Proprietors for a limited time”. """ - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7d90b2e5274a6b89a50d21/ipresearch-designlaw-201207.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7d90b2e5274...