this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
4 points (100.0% liked)
Hacker News
2176 readers
1232 users here now
Posts from the RSS Feed of HackerNews.
The feed sometimes contains ads and posts that have been removed by the mod team at HN.
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
2010-ish: copying is not theft, stealing a thing leaves one less left, copying it makes one thing more, that's what copying's for... π΅πΆπ΅π΄ββ οΈπ΄ββ οΈπ΄ββ οΈ
2025:
I'm myself not overly enthusiastic about AI, not at all. I think LLMs are mostly bullshit generators with very little practical use. But from a public policy point of view, the stance that training AI should require consent of or payment to the copyright holders is IMHO wrong; if we accept it, what is next? Humans summarizing and paraphrasing sources (e.g. for a wiki article) should require consent/payment? Humans learning from sources should require consent/payment? I think wanting a free and open society means taking the side of AI operators, not copyright holders, in this matter.
I also don't trust cloudflare on this. I'd bet they will take a percentage or charge for the feature. I don't believe for a second that they actually give a shit.
I don't know what solution could be more adequate in such a complex problem. But why is it necessary to compare humans with AI? Humans and AI don't necessarily have to have the same rights, rather the opposite.