>In the same way a writer reads books and use that knowledge to create more, an ai model can do the same. No, it can't. Literally. The AI model doesn't decide

>In the same way a writer reads books and use that knowledge to create more, an ai model can do the same. No, it can't. Literally. The AI model doesn't decide which data goes into training it. People do. These people are doing something very, very bad. Also, the AI model can't be held responsible for its actions. Again, people that create it and use it can be, however. People on HN like to point out that an AI model is "just a tool", so work created with AI is still the work of the user. It's only reasonable to point out that a tool is not the same thing as a writer. A tool lacks agency. Therefore, a tool isn't "learning" just like a writer. A ZIP file isn't "learning" when it's created by transforming data into a binary file. Neither does a JPEG file. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If the AI model is equivalent to a sentient human being in your eyes, it should have the same rights and responsibilities. As long as it's being used, the equivalence isn't there.