Hacker News Reader

I've seen several varieties of this idea several times, and it always seems pretty straw-mannish to me.

No one is asserting that computers themselves should have rights. But their users certainly do. If it is legal for me, a human person, to do something inside my own brain, why would it not also be legal for me to do a rough approximation of the same thing inside my computer?

View on HN

The luddite argument is understandable for sure, but it is not in the advantage of progress to stall the development of ai with pseudo copyright concerns that are really just disguising the idea that such progress will displace existing people who currently derive benefit from the status quo.

Why do AI grifters love the word "luddite" so much?

How about the idea that these artists were given no choice in how their personal IP was used? Can I just steal your valuable work in the name of my own technical ‘progress?’

Reply on news.ycombinator.com