Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 140 posts

Re: Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

#131

Post by vkou »

mihaic wrote: post #111
vkou wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the point is that Western judicial system largely caters to capital not justice. The problem is that there is no way to make it 'fair'. All the proposed reforms are also incredibly unfair, just in a slightly different way from what we have.

"Fair" is always impossible, but the goal is "fairer", which really is possible if we accept that lawyers and big corps have to have it slightly worse so everyone else has it significantly better.

Okay, I'll bite.

You tell me how to fix it.

And I'll tell you how a bad actor will abuse your fix.

Re: Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

#132

Post by nvy »

seabass-labrax wrote: post #128
spxneo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its that Andreesseen is engaging in what most would describe as security fraud with crypto and that he feels emboldened by it. lot of voices in washington to make an example out of him. not sure if he's aware

Thanks - I feel I'm still missing a link though, as Andreesseen seems to be all about blockchains and cryptocurrency, and this article is about nefarious uses of generative AI technology by SEO firms. I don't immediately see a common thread.

A16Z is a major investor of "Open" "AI" and the techno-optimism movement espouses the belief that technology is inherently good (which is patently false).

Re: Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

#133

Post by tim333 »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #117
ahartmetz wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mostly just the US judicial system. The US has about 3x the amount of lawyers per capita compared to other Western nations. The glorification of lawyers in US media is sometimes a bit sickening as a non-US citizen.

It's a weird quirk that having so many lawyers hasn't driven down the cost of their services but seems to have instead driven up demand.

I think cause and effect is a litigious system -> demand for lawyers -> lots of them, well paid.

Some of the system being like that probably comes partly from the founding idea of "a government of laws and not of men" and the US constitution.

Re: Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

#135

Post by nine_zeros »

Intralexical wrote: post #75
nine_zeros wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are enough people desperate enough that they will take unusual risks. Some of these people will become successful. Others are the suckers who will spend their lives chasing gold but never reach it.

If they're all taking "risks", then by definition the result is luck/random. So then what separates your "successful" from your "suckers"?

The only difference between suckers and successful people is the outcome. If the outcome was truly meaningful for the individual, they were successful. Otherwise, they were just a sucker in other individual's games.

Re: Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

#136

Post by Cheezemansam »

celestialcheese wrote: post #123
dawnerd wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a counter point feels dirty to abuse photographers not catching NC for you to profit.

Really? So in your world, a writer's mistake is abuse, in the same way legal professionals using the copyright system to profit off of a small publishing businesses is? It's like arguing that punitive fines for minor infractions, like jaywalking or speeding, would be justified because "you broke the law". The outrageous maximum penalties ($100k/infringement), the nuance of fair use and copyright law, and the resultin…

>A writer's mistake is abuse

I thought we were talking about companies. Why should the owner of the work care about whether your writer was on too tight of a timeline to properly check whether they were allowed to use the photographer's work for free? Yes, a company stealing people's work is abusive, and I am not sure why we should be sympathetic when some small % of them happen to have aggressive representation.

Re: Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

#137

Post by mihaic »

vkou wrote: post #131
mihaic wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Fair" is always impossible, but the goal is "fairer", which really is possible if we accept that lawyers and big corps have to have it slightly worse so everyone else has it significantly better.

Okay, I'll bite. You tell me how to fix it. And I'll tell you how a bad actor will abuse your fix.

If a lawsuit is dismissed by a judge as frivolous, automatically put a minimum fee of a few good thousand dollars that the claimant now has to pay. Of course, it can be appealed, but the minimum fee on the same judgement just goes up.

Of course there are tens of other small improvements that could bring improvements, starting from simplifications of the legal code to small claims courts that would be allowed to punish minor offenses by corporations that are repeated on a systemic scale.

What are the abuses that you see, and most of all, do you think those abuses would be worse that the current abuses?

Re: Fake AI law firms are sending fake DMCA threats to generate fake SEO gains

#138

Post by BrandoElFollito »

vkou wrote: post #131
mihaic wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Fair" is always impossible, but the goal is "fairer", which really is possible if we accept that lawyers and big corps have to have it slightly worse so everyone else has it significantly better.

Okay, I'll bite. You tell me how to fix it. And I'll tell you how a bad actor will abuse your fix.

Not OP but if the costs were a function of the wealth (highly nonlinear, such as exponential) then a large company would need to think twice before going to court.

This also means that the smaller players wood get drained out if they try to abuse the system.

Another thing is that the CEO wild be forced to attend, or have very high costs to not be there. This is too ensure that me, as an individual, have much more to loose personally (and can be exhausted) in front of a corporation who has leaders wise job is to be at the court.

I did not put a lot of thoughts on the ideas, but the basic one is too make everyone suffer the same relatively.

This is partly sourced from Finland roads, where you pay in function of your wealth when you cross the law

Post reply on HN