[renewiltord]

This stuff is all a bit much. Fan fiction sites are all “creative content lifted without your consent”. You think J K Rowling consented to Harry x Hermione slash fiction? Or Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality? Absolutely non-consensual.

All of this stuff is clearly a highly cherry-picked gymnastic exercise to justify a pre-existing position. Classic Elephant and Rider stuff.

It’s the same as support for the snail darter. Same as the story about how groups shouldn’t go out during COVID but BLM protests are fine. And if by some incredible chance it had been the FSF or Brewster Kahle who had produced GPT then you guys would be talking about how information should be unchained because creative work belongs to all Man.

Couching this blatantly motivated reasoning by quoting past philosophers is just such middle-brow woe-is-me whining. Take one look at yourselves in an honest sense. Do you have any principles or will you slave them all to your outcomes?

And now I must repeat the litany lest one assume that my opposition to this kind of balderdash be construed as some kind of political tribalism:

* I don’t think we should destroy endangered species

* I think COVID wasn’t a hoax and does spread in large groups

* I think people have a right to protest if they are discriminated against and that includes the black people at BLM

* I love the Internet Archive and have donated to them

[weaksauce]

> Same as the story about how groups shouldn’t go out during COVID but BLM protests are fine.

i don't think you have a good grasp of why that it was ok for outdoor protests to happen but people should not go out into crowded buildings. the chance of you getting sick from a protest is much less than the chance of you getting sick from going to an indoor gathering at say a club. getting sick is not a binary on or off. it's exposure time and magnitude vs. your immune system's defenses.

[renewiltord]

I don't think you have a good grasp of modeling disease spread and are repeating things you read online without comprehension. Repeated exposure from multi-day protests in large groups of 3 person / sq. m. with multiple tent structures shared by people is not the same as 10,000 people climbing K2 one day at a time.

[rekrsiv]

You're ignoring the fact that going outside to protest wasn't something you could just decide not to do, just like buying groceries. BLM protests and gathering indoors for fun are not equal.

[aydyn]

You were literally forced to go protest? Interesting.

[masswerk]

I think, you're mistaking I.P. and creative effort. Certainly, there must be a reason for people reading, even searching for this stuff, beyond the mention of a well-protected trademark.

[renewiltord]

I see. What things that I said are no longer coherent when one makes a distinction between IP and creative effort?

[masswerk]

Well, let's say, an alternative history novel, is it just ripping off a history textbook or is there more going on?

[renewiltord]

How about an exact duplicate of the all characters but they have sex with each other?

[masswerk]

So, because of certain tech patents, patents and IP are bogus in general? What's the point, then?

(Meaning, if we're making generalisation from worst examples a virtue, there will be hardly an argument left. E.g., as there are buggy programs, LLMs are just yet another bug.)

[strken]

I'm already talking about how information should be free. The idea that a reader is infringing on the copyright of a work by reading it and learning is ridiculous.

At the same time, if someone designs a robot that prints out copyright-infringing material out of the blue, then they are infringing copyright every time it does so.

[rekrsiv]

You forgot to provide a counter-argument to the author's position while you attacked them personally.