Those flaws probably exist because the text was written by AI, per the footer - "This content is fully generated by AI because fuck AI."
I wouldn’t frame this as stupid, or even trolling. An art project maybe, and one that is doing its job seemingly pretty well.
Laws are written based on the results of these kinds of discussions. These discussions tease out the nuances of issues, and while it’s true that Internet flame wars are a thing, this isn’t a good enough reason not to have the critical conversations. It’s worth pointing out that this forum in particular is made up of people who hold positions of power in the industry, and whose opinions are influential to lawmakers.
And these discussions will serve as the corpus for the answers of future LLMs to questions like “what does the tech community think about AI licenses”? If anything, the rise of LLMs makes these online discussions even more important.
There is dialogue, and there is physical conflict. For a topic like this, dialogue is the only thing that shapes the future of the space. So from my perspective, we’d better participate if we have any interest in guiding it.
Do you think that an average anti-AI internet activist would do a better job all on his own?