3 ms·

Is it strange to you that cars and pedestrians are both subject to different rules? They both utilise friction and gravity to travel along the ground. I'm curio

Is it strange to you that cars and pedestrians are both subject to different rules? They both utilise friction and gravity to travel along the ground. I'm curious if you see a difference between them, and if you could describe what it is.

ta8645 3y ago
Both cars and pedestrians can be videotaped in public, without asking for their explicit permission. That video can be manipulated by a computer to produce an artwork that is then put on public display. No compensation need be offered to anyone.
- estebank 3y ago
  > Both cars and pedestrians can be videotaped in public, without asking for their explicit permission. This is not universally true. Legislation is different from place to place.
  - ta8645 3y ago
    Hardly the point. The same can be said for road rules between vehicles and pedestrians, for example in major Indian cities, it's pretty much a free-for-all.
    - estebank 3y ago
      My point is that in a lot of places in the US you can point a video camera at the street and record. In Germany, you can't. The law in some locales makes a distinction between manual recording (writing or drawing your surroundings) and mechanized recording (photographing or filming). Scalability of an action is taken into consideration on whether something is ok to do or not.
      - ta8645 3y ago
        That has no bearing at all on the issue at hand. The same can be said of the original argument that started this thread.
        thfuran 3y ago
        You think scalability isn't relevant to the difference between a person doing something by hand or with software operating on the entire internet?
        johnnyanmac 3y ago
        Yeah, that's the oddest part of many of the pro-AI arguments. They want to anthromopotize the idea of learning but also clearly understand that the scalability of a bot exceeds that of a human. They also don't seem to have much experience in the artist world. An artist usually can't reproduce a picture from memory, and if they can they are subject to copyright infringement depending on what and how they depict it, even if the image isn't a complete copy. By this logic of "bots are humans" a bot should be subject if they make a Not-legally-disctinct-enough talking mouse

ta8645 3y ago

Both cars and pedestrians can be videotaped in public, without asking for their explicit permission. That video can be manipulated by a computer to produce an artwork that is then put on public display. No compensation need be offered to anyone.

estebank 3y ago
> Both cars and pedestrians can be videotaped in public, without asking for their explicit permission. This is not universally true. Legislation is different from place to place.
- ta8645 3y ago
  Hardly the point. The same can be said for road rules between vehicles and pedestrians, for example in major Indian cities, it's pretty much a free-for-all.
  - estebank 3y ago
    My point is that in a lot of places in the US you can point a video camera at the street and record. In Germany, you can't. The law in some locales makes a distinction between manual recording (writing or drawing your surroundings) and mechanized recording (photographing or filming). Scalability of an action is taken into consideration on whether something is ok to do or not.
    - ta8645 3y ago
      That has no bearing at all on the issue at hand. The same can be said of the original argument that started this thread.
      - thfuran 3y ago
        You think scalability isn't relevant to the difference between a person doing something by hand or with software operating on the entire internet?
        johnnyanmac 3y ago
        Yeah, that's the oddest part of many of the pro-AI arguments. They want to anthromopotize the idea of learning but also clearly understand that the scalability of a bot exceeds that of a human. They also don't seem to have much experience in the artist world. An artist usually can't reproduce a picture from memory, and if they can they are subject to copyright infringement depending on what and how they depict it, even if the image isn't a complete copy. By this logic of "bots are humans" a bot should be subject if they make a Not-legally-disctinct-enough talking mouse