[waynesonfire]

Of course it's robbery. I don't think anyone is truly arguing it's not. The issue is that, if we don't do it, China will. Game over.

I'm surprised I hvan't seen more economist scholars exploring this topic; it's a fastincating phenomenon. I've seen folks try and re-visit history and compare what's happening with AI to some historic event--but, we've never seen anything quite like it. As much as history repeats itself; at the forefront of innvotaion it doesn't.

I suspect that there will one day be an AI tax as society tries to reclaim the value of the theft; maybe even UBI of some form. Until then, buy the stocks and ride the theft wave. The economsits are certainly exploring the K shaped economy, and this is why.

[proofofcontempt]

This argument of "if we don't do it, someone else will" to justify theft is so tiring. The companies doing the stealing are collectively the same ones that have power to prevent it, if they were incentivised to do so.

[evenhash]

> The issue is that, if we don't do it, China will.

These AI companies aren’t state enterprises. How is geopolitics a justification?

If it were just the military training them, probably no one would care about the copyright infringement angle, it makes sense that the government could ignore those rules for national security.

But Mark Zuckerberg isn’t training his models to protect us from China. He’s doing it to make himself even more ridiculously wealthy.