4 ms·
I'm going to take the side of the IP argument based on whatever hurts big business most. If they want to "steal" from the little guy by locking everything up b
by Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
I'm going to take the side of the IP argument based on whatever hurts big business most. If they want to "steal" from the little guy by locking everything up behind copyright (or patents or trademarks) then I will oppose it. If they want to "steal" from the little guy by ingesting his works into the AI machine then I will oppose it.
Notice how governments and companies became "worried" about AI when people were starting to emulate certain styles in the images generated. Suddenly they needed to be regulated and censored (even harder).
- coldblues 3y agoGood take. Big companies should suffer so that the regular person can strive and compete. It is clear that big AI companies virtue signal so that they can exploit regulations and become monopolies. In the end the only thing enforcing these laws is government that can only enforce through punishment and ultimately violence, and you can fend that with enough money. AI training will continue to be done illegally and in the gray by both regular parties and those that can pay for the privilege. Most of the artists I follow draw styles and subjects that can't easily be replicated using AI. Anyone with a refined enough taste should not feel threatened or relieved. The continued technological progress serves those who adapt. What you should fear is surveillance tech.