>AI risk is a spectacularization of a new source of wealth
Only if society allows the use of AIs that have been trained on content for which they didn't have the legal rights to use for that purpose (basically theft).
Some of the big AI LLMs of today have been trained on content from Twitter, Reddit, Quora, probably HN as well, and even more shockingly on individual artists' artwork and pirated books from libgen without their owners' and IP holders' permission. How is that not theft?
Anything I (a human) can listen to or look at publicly for free is free game AFAIK.
The sum of all this becomes my "experience of life", and I can draw upon that knowledge to create new stuff.
The only difference between an AI and me is speed and capability to remember.
So ... does the act of reading HN become theft just because it is done by a non-human, with inhuman efficiency?
Personally I don't think so.
We could continue the conversation with a debate about whether or not the AI's outputs (creations) should be restricted (legally) in the same way as a human...
(As opposed to precise-reproduction in output, covered by copyright)