3 ms·

Extremely close but not exact copying is already not allowed. Human artists have tried that. Just because AI threatens to produce equally valuable material for

Extremely close but not exact copying is already not allowed. Human artists have tried that. Just because AI threatens to produce equally valuable material for much lower cost doesn't mean that's wrong. It just means those people got out-competed in the market. That's what the free market is for - to serve the consumers, not the producers.

keiferski 2y ago
I don't even disagree that these tools aren't useful - I use them myself and agree that they allow for creating things for cheap that used to cost a lot. The reason everyone is irritated at the tech companies is not so much because they made it cheaper to do these things, but because they seem to have such a smarmy, slimy attitude about the whole thing - these comments by the Microsoft CEO of AI as a prime example. They could have just trained their models on old public domain content, Wikipedia, or a million other things, but instead they want to justify raiding content that was shared for free under different expectations. This is only going to result in a locked-down, paywalled web that is pretty much the opposite of 90s net values.
latexr 2y ago
> It just means those people got out-competed in the market. That's what the free market is for - to serve the consumers, not the producers. For one, if you serve only the consumers at the detriment of the producers, soon you’ll have no producers left (or, more likely, a handful of extremely powerful ones which will stay stale as they have no reason to innovate). For another, you appear to be arguing as if the “free market” is an unambiguous positive, when it very much is not. It doesn’t even adequately serve consumers, it serves businesses. The free market is what makes companies knowingly produce and sell harmful substances, like cigarettes or lead paint.
- EnigmaFlare 2y ago
  If AI stagnates, then some human will out-perform it and be able to sell their work. The AI won't be able to generate competitive work because it's stagnant at a lower level. I'm not arguing free market is all positive, just pointing out that the whole reason people see free markets as a good thing is because they benefit people (consumers). They have downsides too but those aren't the reason they're popular. Nobody wants free markets so they can get poisoned more easily.

keiferski 2y ago

I don't even disagree that these tools aren't useful - I use them myself and agree that they allow for creating things for cheap that used to cost a lot. The reason everyone is irritated at the tech companies is not so much because they made it cheaper to do these things, but because they seem to have such a smarmy, slimy attitude about the whole thing - these comments by the Microsoft CEO of AI as a prime example. They could have just trained their models on old public domain content, Wikipedia, or a million other things, but instead they want to justify raiding content that was shared for free under different expectations. This is only going to result in a locked-down, paywalled web that is pretty much the opposite of 90s net values.

latexr 2y ago

> It just means those people got out-competed in the market. That's what the free market is for - to serve the consumers, not the producers. For one, if you serve only the consumers at the detriment of the producers, soon you’ll have no producers left (or, more likely, a handful of extremely powerful ones which will stay stale as they have no reason to innovate). For another, you appear to be arguing as if the “free market” is an unambiguous positive, when it very much is not. It doesn’t even adequately serve consumers, it serves businesses. The free market is what makes companies knowingly produce and sell harmful substances, like cigarettes or lead paint.

EnigmaFlare 2y ago
If AI stagnates, then some human will out-perform it and be able to sell their work. The AI won't be able to generate competitive work because it's stagnant at a lower level. I'm not arguing free market is all positive, just pointing out that the whole reason people see free markets as a good thing is because they benefit people (consumers). They have downsides too but those aren't the reason they're popular. Nobody wants free markets so they can get poisoned more easily.