6 ms·

New accounts created to shovel a narrative of neo-luddite nonsense into the discourse without addressing a single point with substantiation. "IP Theft" is a lo

by aeon_ai 7mo ago

New accounts created to shovel a narrative of neo-luddite nonsense into the discourse without addressing a single point with substantiation. "IP Theft" is a loaded term that has already been determined to be unfounded in US law. Alsup stated that models were one of the most transformative uses of content he may ever see in his lifetime, and deemed it fair use. No matter how you slice it, this technology and capability isn't going away, and that goal post quickly shifts when it's pointed out that "ethically trained" AI gets as much hate as anything else.

Paracompact 7mo ago
Apologies to the user if they aren't an alt and this is just their genuine first post, but: We really ought to delegitimize the whole "creating alts to post unpopular opinions" trend. I know HN is very privacy-centric, but it just seems wrong to me when someone isn't willing to stake their reputation on (what I charitably assume are) genuinely held controversial opinions.
- dddgghhbbfblk 7mo ago
  I mean I assume it's a bot comment. It has that LLM stink to it in writing style even without the "new account" signal.
- bakugo 7mo ago
  That's kind of the point - encouraging people to post genuine thoughts that they otherwise wouldn't because of the fear that they might suffer for it later. Sure, it doesn't always encourage the most well thought-out comments, but raising the bar for new commenters with no/low reputation is how you end up with echo chambers.
- dinkumthinkum 7mo ago
  I think the policy is there for a reason. I think it encourages more free discussion. I don't know if you are upset that there is a way for people to express thoughtful ideas without being bullied for doing wrongthink or havingt he wrong opinions.
AngryData 7mo ago
Whats wrong with the original luddites that you would try and use them to disparage modern worker rights advocates? They were right. Automation did reduce their quality of life and destroy their wages, and it is only through the luddites and other worker rights organizations making their demands unignorable that gave workers more modern and fair standards like 40 hour weeks, vacations, safety regulations, and unions. You know who built the looms that the luddites later broke? The luddites themselves. They were the one building automated looms under promises that they would make more money and have cheaper fabric. Instead what they got was towns suffering in poverty under garbage wages, shitty working conditions with longer hours, and worse quality fabric as the corporate looms penny pinched their fibre and fabric more and more. If the benefits of automated looms were actually shared with the luddites to start with, maybe their society wouldn't have gone down the toilet and they wouldn't have been so pissed. And today corporations are far more powerful than the capitalists back in the luddite days, both monetarily and legally.
- martin-t 7mo ago
  People should own the product of their work. It's really that simple, all the inequality, injustice and exploitation that's been happening since the first industrial revolution keeps happening because people who do the work only get paid a fraction of the value they produced and only as long as they keep working while the surplus and ownership goes to people who don't do any work, can be used to make more money which gives them more ownership and is heritable. BTW, I am really happy whenever I see another person who knows who the luddites really were. The rest are condemned to repeat this shit and we're all worse off because of them.
  - auggierose 7mo ago
    > People should own the product of their work. You do own your work, but you agreed to sell it for a salary. Makes sense, because there is often no tangible "product" you could own otherwise. What should cleaners own?
    - AngryData 7mo ago
martin-t 7mo ago
IP was the wrong tool for code from the start, it was just convenient to use because it already existed. What should be protected is human work (it and natural resources are the only things to which humanity ascribes inherent value, all other value is built on top of those). LLMs are trained on millions of lifetimes of human work while all the income from them goes to the rich at the top. If you don't see an issue with this, not only do you not care about fairness and justice, you also haven't even gamed out in your head what happens 5 or maybe 15 years down the line.

by aeon_ai 7mo ago

Paracompact 7mo ago

Apologies to the user if they aren't an alt and this is just their genuine first post, but: We really ought to delegitimize the whole "creating alts to post unpopular opinions" trend. I know HN is very privacy-centric, but it just seems wrong to me when someone isn't willing to stake their reputation on (what I charitably assume are) genuinely held controversial opinions.

dddgghhbbfblk 7mo ago
I mean I assume it's a bot comment. It has that LLM stink to it in writing style even without the "new account" signal.
bakugo 7mo ago
That's kind of the point - encouraging people to post genuine thoughts that they otherwise wouldn't because of the fear that they might suffer for it later. Sure, it doesn't always encourage the most well thought-out comments, but raising the bar for new commenters with no/low reputation is how you end up with echo chambers.
dinkumthinkum 7mo ago
I think the policy is there for a reason. I think it encourages more free discussion. I don't know if you are upset that there is a way for people to express thoughtful ideas without being bullied for doing wrongthink or havingt he wrong opinions.

AngryData 7mo ago

Whats wrong with the original luddites that you would try and use them to disparage modern worker rights advocates? They were right. Automation did reduce their quality of life and destroy their wages, and it is only through the luddites and other worker rights organizations making their demands unignorable that gave workers more modern and fair standards like 40 hour weeks, vacations, safety regulations, and unions. You know who built the looms that the luddites later broke? The luddites themselves. They were the one building automated looms under promises that they would make more money and have cheaper fabric. Instead what they got was towns suffering in poverty under garbage wages, shitty working conditions with longer hours, and worse quality fabric as the corporate looms penny pinched their fibre and fabric more and more. If the benefits of automated looms were actually shared with the luddites to start with, maybe their society wouldn't have gone down the toilet and they wouldn't have been so pissed. And today corporations are far more powerful than the capitalists back in the luddite days, both monetarily and legally.

martin-t 7mo ago
People should own the product of their work. It's really that simple, all the inequality, injustice and exploitation that's been happening since the first industrial revolution keeps happening because people who do the work only get paid a fraction of the value they produced and only as long as they keep working while the surplus and ownership goes to people who don't do any work, can be used to make more money which gives them more ownership and is heritable. BTW, I am really happy whenever I see another person who knows who the luddites really were. The rest are condemned to repeat this shit and we're all worse off because of them.
- auggierose 7mo ago
  > People should own the product of their work. You do own your work, but you agreed to sell it for a salary. Makes sense, because there is often no tangible "product" you could own otherwise. What should cleaners own?
  - AngryData 7mo ago

martin-t 7mo ago

IP was the wrong tool for code from the start, it was just convenient to use because it already existed. What should be protected is human work (it and natural resources are the only things to which humanity ascribes inherent value, all other value is built on top of those). LLMs are trained on millions of lifetimes of human work while all the income from them goes to the rich at the top. If you don't see an issue with this, not only do you not care about fairness and justice, you also haven't even gamed out in your head what happens 5 or maybe 15 years down the line.