Live data from Hacker News

An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

theaiunderwriter.substack.com

171–180 of 927 posts

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#171
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not getting "better." It always just copied. That's all it /can/ do That's true of all the best artists ever. > They're just there to whitewash away liability from blatantly stealing someone else's content. That's because that's not a thing. Ownership of "content" is a legal fiction invented to give states more control over creativity. Nobody who copies bytes which represent my music is a "thief". To be a thie…

OK, you're plunging deep into the ethos of IP piracy, and staking your claim that "None exists." If that is deemed TRUE, then there's nothing to ever discuss about AI... or animated pornography where a well-known big-eared mouse bangs a Kryptonian orphan wearing a cape. The reality of our current international laws, going back centuries, disagrees. And most artists disagree.

> The reality of our current international laws, going back centuries, disagrees

Perhaps I need a bit of education here, but have there been _international_ laws regarding intellectual property for centuries?!

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#172
post #137

I was really hoping that the conversation around AI art would at least be partially centered on the perhaps now dated "2008 pirate party" idea that intellectual property, the royalty system, the draconian copyright laws that we have today are deeply silly, rooted in a fiction, and used over and over again, primarily by the rich and powerful, to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation. Unfortunately, i…

The idea of open sourcing everything and nullifying patents would benefit corporations like Disney and OpenAI vastly more than it would benefit the people. The first thing that would happen is that BigCorp would eat up every interesting or useful piece of art, technology, and culture that has ever been created and monetize the life out of it. These legal protections are needed by the people. To the Pirate Party's cre…

>The first thing that would happen is that BigCorp would eat up every interesting or useful piece of art, technology, and culture that has ever been created and monetize the life out of it.

Wait, I'm still trying to figure out the difference between your imaginary world and the world we live in now?

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#173
post #36
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not getting "better." It always just copied. That's all it /can/ do That's true of all the best artists ever. > They're just there to whitewash away liability from blatantly stealing someone else's content. That's because that's not a thing. Ownership of "content" is a legal fiction invented to give states more control over creativity. Nobody who copies bytes which represent my music is a "thief". To be a thie…

> Ownership of "content" is a legal fiction [...] To be a thief, they'd need to, you know, come to my house and steal something. That's just a legal fiction invented so people can pretend to own physical objects even though we should all know that in this world you can never truly own anything. Everything we do or protect is made up. You've just drawn the arbitrary line in the sand as to what can be "owned" in a diff…

Well, one rudimentary difference is that bytes can be (and seem wont to be) copied, whereas if you steal my jeans, I'm standing there in my underwear.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#174
post #137

I was really hoping that the conversation around AI art would at least be partially centered on the perhaps now dated "2008 pirate party" idea that intellectual property, the royalty system, the draconian copyright laws that we have today are deeply silly, rooted in a fiction, and used over and over again, primarily by the rich and powerful, to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation. Unfortunately, i…

Essentially: “information wants to be free”.

I agree.

But this must include the dissolution of patents. Otherwise corporations and the owners of the infrastructure will simply control everything, including the easily replicable works of individuals.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#175
post #137

I was really hoping that the conversation around AI art would at least be partially centered on the perhaps now dated "2008 pirate party" idea that intellectual property, the royalty system, the draconian copyright laws that we have today are deeply silly, rooted in a fiction, and used over and over again, primarily by the rich and powerful, to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation. Unfortunately, i…

Gonna submit that business model to a YC 2026 batch.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation. How is copyright stifling innovation? You could not rip something off more blatantly than Gravity, which had the lawsuit dismissed entirely. Taurus vs Stairway to Heaven, the list goes on and on and on. You can often get away with nearly murder ripping off other people's stuff.

Because it's self indulgent wankery. If I, as writer and an artist, have just the most absolutely brilliant thoughts, and write them down into a book or draw the most beautiful artwork, I can earn money off that well into my afterlife with copyright. Meanwhile the carpenter who is no less bright, can only sell the chair he's built once. In order to make money off of it, he must labor to produce a second or even a thi…

The only people making chairs by hand today are exceptionally well-paid artisanal craft carpenters and/or designers/studios.

It's not at all unusual for popular/iconic furniture designs to be copyrighted.

Reality is people who invent truly original, useful, desirable things are the most important human beings on the planet.

Nothing that makes civilisation what it is has happened without original inventiveness and creativity. It's the single most important resource there is.

These people should be encouraged and rewarded, whether it's in academia, industry, as freelance inventors/creators, or in some other way.

It's debatable if the current copyright system is the best way to do that, because often it isn't, for all kinds of reasons.

But the principle remains. Destroy rewards for original invention and creativity and you destroy all progress.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care for this line of argument. It's like saying you can't hold a position that trespassing should be illegal while also holding that commercial businesses should be legally required to have public restrooms. Yes, both of these positions are related to land rights and the former is pro- while the latter is anti-, but it's a perfectly coherent set of positions. OpenAI can absolutely be anti-copyright in the se…

No, the exception they are asking for (we can train on copyrighted material and the image produced is non-copyright infringing) is copyright infringing in the most basic sense. I'll prove it by induction: Imagine that I have a service where I "train" a model on a single image of Indiana Jones. Now you prompt it, and my model "generates" the same image. I sell you this service, and no money goes to the copyright holde…

>There's no reason why training on a billion images is any different

You gloss over this as if it's a given. I don't agree. I think you're doing a different thing when you're sampling billions of things equallly.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#178
post #137

I was really hoping that the conversation around AI art would at least be partially centered on the perhaps now dated "2008 pirate party" idea that intellectual property, the royalty system, the draconian copyright laws that we have today are deeply silly, rooted in a fiction, and used over and over again, primarily by the rich and powerful, to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation. Unfortunately, i…

I think what you observe is more like a natural blowback to the prevailing idea that this is somehow beyond critique because it will fundamentally change culture and civilization forever.

There's a bit of irony here too. The intellectual discourse around intellectural property, a diverse and lively one from an academic standpoint, the whole free and open source software movements, software patents, the piracy movement and so on have analyzed the history, underlying ideas and values in detail for the past thirty years. Most people know roughly what is at stake, where they stand, and can defend their position in an honest way.

Then comes new technology, everyone and their mother gets excited about it, and steamrolls all those lofty ideas into "oh look at all the shiny things it can produce!". Be careful what you wish for.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#179
post #15

> Still, the near perfect mimicry is an uncomfortable reminder that AI is getting better at copying and closer to I completely disagree. It's not getting "better." It always just copied. That's all it /can/ do. How anyone expected novel outputs from this technology is beyond me. It's highly noticeable if you do a minimal analysis, but all modern "AI" tools are just copyright thiefs. They're just there to whitewash aw…

> It's not getting "better." It always just copied. That's all it /can/ do That's true of all the best artists ever. > They're just there to whitewash away liability from blatantly stealing someone else's content. That's because that's not a thing. Ownership of "content" is a legal fiction invented to give states more control over creativity. Nobody who copies bytes which represent my music is a "thief". To be a thie…

> Ownership of "content" is a legal fiction invented to give states more control over creativity.

Ownership is a legal fiction invented because it is perceived to encourage behavior that is seen as desirable; this is no more true of ownership of intellectual property or other intangible personal property than it is of tangible personal property or real estate.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really care. Either enforce the current copyright regime and sue the AI companies to dust. Or abolish copyright and let us all go hog wild. But this halfway house where you can ignore the law as long as you've got enough money is disgusting.

Or treat AI training as within the coverage of the current fair use regime (which is certainly defensible within the current copyright regime), while prosecuting the use of AI models to create infringing copies and derivative works that do not themselves have permission or a reasonable claim to be within the scope of fair use as a violation (and prosecuted hosted AI firms for contributory infringement where their act…

^ I feel like I almost never see this take, and I don't understand why because frankly, it strikes me at patently obvious! Of course the tool isn't responsible, and the person who uses it is.
Post reply on HN