• jcg@halubilo.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I think the question of fair use is separate from the question of piracy, and probably separate from the question of intellectual property in general. Even if we were to protect fair use, that doesn’t make it legal to wholesale copy books. Individual piracy from people who can’t really afford it is one thing and largely harmless, even a net good. I know people who only started reading books from particular authors because they pirated one copy and bought others. That’s very different from a company downloading entire libraries of books without paying. Shifting the question from piracy to fair use is just another way of making you think of the wrong question.

    I’d like to live in a world that doesn’t gatekeep property. But we live in a world where artists aren’t paid for their work directly, and in that world intellectual property is necessary.

  • her01n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Copyright infringement is not theft, and it is not immoral. It has never been, and it will not start to be, just because a company we don’t like is doing it.

    • DornerStan@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      It just proves that property rights are, and always have been, arbitrary, based on power and material incentives. Not the inalienable rights that liberals think they are.

    • FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      All im saying is if the courts determine a business can use copyrighted material to make profit without permission, that seems to set a precedent that makes the high seas legal. Those pirates often arent even profiting off it.

  • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    This guy has the kind of face that made me completely unsurprised when the allegations from his sister came out

    • lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Between all of the AI hype and the AI panic, my biggest concern is that the laws will be so poorly written that simple algorithms like A* will end up illegal and AI in general will be outlawed. We’ll have a Butlerian Jihad because a bunch of daffy CEOs simply said their machines will replace humans when they can’t. Our children will be forced to drink sapho juice and eat spice so they can work in a server farm made of humans.

  • mr_eckneim@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 days ago

    Oh no oh god what would we all do if the AI race finally ended. How disasterous can something be OH NO …

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Training is transformative use.

        A gigabyte of linear algebra that can rap about the Silmarillion is plainly not just copying. It’s not even large enough to contain a meaningful fragment of every book that shaped it.

        • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Downvoters don’t know what “fair use” means. Or do, but would rather work backwards from kneejerk opposition to an outcome.

          A robot read every book in the library. That’s what libraries are for. If it can’t reproduce any book more closely than a Wikipedia summary, and serves a different purpose - that’s a protected work.

  • FunkyCheese@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why dont he just provide his own teachings

    Start an ai class room so ai companies can pay indians to make videos on subjects for them