Trump: It's Not Doable for AI Companies to Pay for All Copyrighted Input | Hacker News Reader

Trump: It's Not Doable for AI Companies to Pay for All Copyrighted Input

torrentfreak.com

14 pointsvoxadam10 comments

I don't understand why "it's not feasible" is considered a valid argument at all. If it's not feasible to conduct a business without violating others, then perhaps the business shouldn't exist.

Spot on.-

(But but but, said business has:

- Begun to make inroads in the military industrial complex

- Been deemed critical to national interests, including economic

- Been avowed (rightly or not so) as part of a multigenerational revolution

... so, in essence, "too critical to fail" - so it gets a "bailout".-

If it's not feasible to conduct a business without violating others, then perhaps the business shouldn't exist.

Exactly. Which is why it's the copyright cartel that has to lose this time, if there's going to be a fight.

We don't need them as much as we need AI... which is ultimately looking like a better way to organize, analyze and distribute knowledge, even if it never turns out to be a better way to synthesize it.

I deeply disagree. Copyright is far more important than genAI is. Copyright makes it reasonable for people to publish things publicly. Without it, far less stuff is made public and we're all the poorer for it.

I do agree that current copyright law is overly burdensome and badly needs reforming, but I don't agree that it isn't important.

There's no point making stuff public if the public doesn't benefit, though.

Good example: a neighbor and I are negotiating to move our property boundaries. I used AI just this morning to handle some geometric calculations and what-if scenarios that would otherwise have taken days of back-and-forth interaction with the surveyor (who will of course still be needed to verify and certify the results.) Saved everyone concerned a lot of time and effort.

This was possible because everything from surveying textbooks to math tutorials to Python code was ganked wholesale by OpenAI. Without asking anyone's permission first... which would, of course, have been summarily denied.

Would I be better off if I had been forced to study surveying, Python, and geodesic math myself? I don't think so. Or to pay the survey company to answer a lot of naive questions, which is not where they add the most value? I don't think so. And is there any value in letting private entities hold a government-sanctioned monopoly on the training material used by the AI? Again: I don't think so.

Copyright is not a natural right. It's something we pulled out of our asses, very recently at that. It can just as easily go back where it came from. AI will better serve us all, at the end of the day. (Yeah, yeah, I know, it's a cookbook...)

AI, atleast with the current admin, has become a matter of national security. We are way past "Do these companies get to exist" and have entered "How long will these companies exist before nationalized"

It's considered a valid argument because AI is already too big to fail, and AI has already consumed all available copyrighted content, and will continue to do at an exponential rate until we need to boil the oceans just to power the servers. The rules will simply have to be changed to accommodate AI's inevitable all-consumption of reality. Because capitalism.

Suppose you get a degree, say, in mechanical engineering. You later get paid for a job where you needed to apply lots of knowledge that you got from copyrighted textbooks. Is that copyright infringement?

It's not feasible for pirates to pay for all the copyrighted content they resell ... doesn't mean they get to do it.

The difference here is the AI companies have money and made friends with Trump & Co.

Fascinating conclusion. It’s not doable for me to pay for all copyrighted content I want either.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com