How funny it will be if/when we realise that LLMs aren’t even the way to get to real AGI, and we destroyed the value of all human labour for nothing.
Certainly you can make the claim that some forms of labor could have less value, like maybe in the future AI/LLMs become good enough at image generation that concept artists are replaced with a different job role that uses them to produce concept art.
But all forms of labor? Building a house?
How exactly does AI training "destroyed the value of all human labour" when "LLMs aren’t even the way to get to real AGI"? You could plausibly make the argument that AGI might make all human labor obsolete, but the current LLMs are nowhere close to replacing human labor. Sure, some value might be lost, but nowhere near "destroyed the value of all human labour ".
This is moving the goalposts. The original claim was "we destroyed the value of all human labour for nothing", now it's being moved to "it's not inconsequential "
FTFY: "we found a way to remove the archaic copyright system"
And the very few lucrative works would still be protected, because their copyright holders would pay the fee.
The tragedy of current copyright is that there is an enormous mass of copyrighted works that is a) commercially useless or nearly useless, but b) still copyrighted, so other people cannot build on them.
If humans did what some of the AI video gen tools are doing, they’d get sued.