837
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by jonathanvmv8f@lemm.ee to c/memes@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 3 points 5 months ago

... but if a company does it for AI ...

That's the line. Free for people. Not free for companies.

[-] mechoman444@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

Right but that's the thing. You can't have it both ways. Either the information is free or it isn't.

If it is offered for free who queries that information should be irrelevant.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 months ago

I believe it to be relevant, and so do many of the authors of the "information."

[-] mechoman444@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

If the authors of the information wanted to get paid they wouldn't submit their intellectual property to a website that provides said information for free.

Like I said either everyone pays or no one does. You can't have it both ways.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 months ago

... either everyone pays or no one does.

How about this. Either everyone pays, or no one does, or only some of them have to pay - depending on their use.

This all-or-nothing is a false dichotomy. Like look at how much software is free for small scale users or educational or non-profit orgs.

[-] mechoman444@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

And how exactly would this work?

Actually I'll tell you how this is going to work. Sites like Wikipedia, GitHub, stack overflow, ext will have to force every one of their users to open a personal account and conduct constant verifications to make sure they're not AI's.

From what I've seen on the internet people don't like this.

So again it can't be both, either it's all free or it's all paid for. There is no in between.

Look, I know what you want to happen here and I even agree with it on the surface. Cooperations need to pay their fair share and many of them don't. But I don't think you understand the implications of what you're asking for.

Let the AI's learn for free because in a few years it won't matter anyway.

We're on the precipice of a technological singularity and hopefully in our lifetimes the function of a monetary economy will no longer be relevant.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 months ago

Licenses are binding because courts recognise them. For individual players it's usually not worth pursuing, unless you're Nintendo.

But for large, wealthy, or venture backed, enterprises (notably, ones with legal departments) a class action suit is much more feasible.

This is super basic. We can do better. This isn't even like novel legal territory. We went through this with photography and Photoshopping.

[-] mechoman444@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Sir. I think you have the wrong number.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 months ago

Large, wealthy, or venture backed. Companies that like to think of themselves as legit. As having nothing to hide

[-] mechoman444@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

They really need better bot blocking on lemmy.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 months ago

R D R R the old ad botinem; you sure showed me. I didn't expect defeat to taste so sweet, but here I am thoroughly pwned by a measly meatbag

this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
837 points (97.4% liked)

memes

10297 readers
1884 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS