[FeepingCreature]

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of "this person or system cannot create, they can only steal". It seems very dehumanizing, and though LLMs aren't humans I could see the argument very easily turned on people. There is nothing specific to LLMs in it.

[Planktonne]

The people filling the wires with AI content they didn't write aren't fundamentally incapable of creation; they have chosen not to do it, and so are incapable only until they make a better choice.

It's not dehumanising to see the output of someone who isn't creating as uncreative.

[lelanthran]

> I am very uncomfortable with the idea of "this person or system cannot create, they can only steal".

"This person cannot create, they can only steal" is not what was said. "This system cannot create, it can only steal" is what was said.

What do you propose, then? That we aren't allowed to pass moral judgements on systems?

[FeepingCreature]

There's this famous saying about the design of a bear-safe waste container for American national parks: "there is a considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bear and the dumbest tourist." Similarly, I suspect there is a considerable overlap between the creativity of the least creative human and the most creative LLM. Maybe it's that I've seen the same arguments raised for years about comic artists who traced off other people's work...

This will not remain limited to AIs. Learning requires imitation. Our artistic system is already pretty heavily copyrighted, but it could still be a lot more so, and I don't think this would be good for our culture.