Comment on The Irony of 'You Wouldn't Download a Car' Making a Comeback in AI Debates
calcopiritus@lemmy.world 2 months agoDon’t need to get philosophical about what is the difference between human and AI learning.
“Consumed by AI” and “consumed by a human” are two distinct use cases that can have different terms in a license.
stephen01king@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
Why do we need to differentiate those two use cases, anyway? It’s not like they differentiate between a single human or multiple humans consuming the content, or if there are non-humans also consuming it. Differentiating those two use cases is just another example of publishers wanting more money due to greed. I’m not sure why Lemmy is so supportive of that.
calcopiritus@lemmy.world 2 months ago
We need to differentiate between those cases because they are 2 distinct cases. And they are very different.
They don’t even have the same purpose. The purpose of a human learning is: fulfill a desire to learn or acquiring a new skill that will be useful to fulfill another desire. The purpose of AI learning is: increase the value of the model so it can be sold for more.
Lemmy is not an entity that is capable of thought. And I’m not Lemmy. I’m just another person and what you are reading is my opinion.
“Publishers are bad and greedy, therefore everything that hurts them is good for society” is a childish take imo. Not everything is black and white. Copyright exists for a reason. Just removing it won’t make the world better. A law being flawed doesn’t make it worse than not existing.