It's cynical and wrong. What he (seems to be) saying is that it's fine to violate the legal rights of other people if they don't have a large legal department, and you do. It's blindingly obvious that's wrong.
"Everyone in the business" - you mean, the AI training business? Paraphrasing a famous call-girl, "They would say that, wouldn't they?"
>"Everyone in the business" - you mean, the AI training business?
This isn't even limited to tech. Rich people at worst settle with money to break the law, and at best completely get off scot free doing things that would put much pettier offenders behind bars. I steal some bread from a store and go to jail. Some rich dude commits millions in fraud and cover up and still runs for president.
Do Mistral and xAI get to freely scrape the output of Microsoft ChatGPT? I for one, think either answer to this question will turn out bad, for all of them.
Drowning out creativity on the internet with remixed word salad will only be profitable for a short while. After which, people will start looking for human-created stuff, and avoid ai as much as possible. And slowly, it will become possible. Just like adblockers slowly advance.
People may think they want non-AI stuff, but they just want things created with intention. AI is just a tool, and the very best creators will leverage it to take art to a new level.
Well this new level doesn't seem to be here yet, so I'll believe it when I see it. Crypto also "will change the world", except it didn't, for all the confidence of its supporters. Claims about great things in the future are a dime a million.
I'm pretty sure you've seen it many times and not realized, because the creator took care to build upon what the AI produced, giving it polish and a human touch, then didn't advertise it as "AI"
First they violate the law. Then they ignore it. Then ignoring it becomes the new norm. Then the new norm becomes the new law.