Example: I believe that IP is a direct contradiction of nature, sacrificing the advancement of humanity and the world for selfish gain, and therefore is sinful.
Edit: pls do not downvote the comments this is a constructive discussion
Edit2: IP= intellectal property
Edit3: sort by controversal
I kinda feel like all I hear is anti AI talk. Meanwhile I’m in the camp of don’t demonize tools, demonize what people do with the tools that’s damaging.
As for art, I don’t know how to ascribe value to art. The Mona Lisa exists. As do copies of it that are worthless. At what point will the original have no value by virtue of the quality of the copies? Will a molecularly identical copy made with a Star Trek replicator make the original worthless? Or will it always be valued as the original?
if the tool builders stole your work to create them, never compensated the creators, didn’t even ask them - I suspect you’d feel differently. it’s gross and people are like “well, it’s just artists what do we need them for?”
copying isn’t stealing, and modeling isn’t even copying.
the greatest threat an artist faces isn’t that someone might copy their work, but that no one will want to
I wouldn’t. Ideas should be free, and there should be no barriers to them, or ownership considered. If you create a thing, everyone else should be able to use that thing however they wish, and with no limitations, to create their own things. Full stop, no exceptions.
This is why I pirate. I will never consider or acknowledge ownership or license when consuming media, art, or information. If you release an idea to the greater world, then it’s my idea, my art, my music, my software, just as much as it’s yours as the creator. And I’ll do with it whatever I will.
It isn’t the “quality” of the piece that makes it more valuable, but the intrinsic quality of being the original. An exact, molecularly identical copy might make that messy, in that you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between them, but the true original is still the one with the value.
Depends on what tool you’re talking about.
Sadly in this case the tool, in its product form, is already in breach of a moral principle, because it is a derivative work and stealing labor without consent.
If you are referring to the GPT algorithms, that’s more subtle. We need to figure out how to regulate it better.
no, it’s not
How is it not? The most popular GPT models are trained on copyrighted works.
that isn’t stealing.
It is in my country.