23B1

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Not really. I don't just walk up to Random House and get my book on the B&N endcap. Also please define good author.

I'm certain you understood my point.

OP's argument is a common one amongst the IP entitlements crowd.

Totally cool! I'm confused how that's related to what I'm saying though.

Fair use was designed for teachers photocopying pages of Walden for their pupils to read over the weekend. Not industrial-scale laundering of IP to benefit shareholders.

"Information wants to be free"

No, you want it to be free. The people whose labor created that information didn't want it to be free, especially for some gigacorp to launder while hiding behind fair use.

As a long-time writer, this case will have impact on me, but I maintain a fool's hope a Meta loss will significantly weaken IP-laundering megacorps.

OP is making the spurious argument that technology should have the same ethical entitlements as humans. It's on par with "information wants to be free".

[flagged]

My general sense of HN is that it is pretty well moderated even if a bit opaquely. It's a niche audience who is gonna have their preferences that will bleed through, but also it's not designed to enable provocative or controversial discussions just because those tend to hit runaway condition pretty quickly. I myself have been hit a few times with the hammer but on the whole its been a pretty consistently good community even if a little monoculture-y.

I don't think it's about one ideology over the other. It's about extremism of any sort that threatens to become violent. I'm not justifying or excusing it, but in my limited experience it's mostly about the bureaucratic justification of continued funding. Then the nuance becomes: 'Are these extremist movements genuine speech, or a function of foreign interference' and more often than not, it's both.

(I have no idea why the parent comment was flagged, would love an explanation for it though)

And those graduates also subsequently make their way into the IC.

It would actually be brilliant of the CCP to further entwine itself with Musk via acquisition. I think it goes without saying that the man is an opportunist and a globalist in populist clothing.

(Fwiw I like that he owns Twitter now if for nothing more than the schadenfreude)

Commentary is often second- and third-order.

Manga nerds on Tumblr aren't the artists I'm worried about. I'm talking about people whose intellectual labor is being laundered by gigacorps and the inane defenses mounted by their techbro serfdom.

For sure.

I'm really just pointing out the inconsistent technocrat attitude towards labor, sovereignty, and resources.

Computer touchers awash in luxury beliefs.

Or mutually-supporting fires, a death-spiral of agitprop fueling already bent values.

Stupid false dichotomy.

Because the Chinese are openly hostile towards the United States and its interests, whereas American companies have a vested interest in the U.S. and are beholden to its laws.

I don't know why realpolitik is so hard for technologists to understand, perhaps too much utopian fantasy scifi?

I never used the word evil.

That said, machines don't have natural rights, and you don't get to use them to violate mine.

cool

scale

> Training does not constitute "copying" under copyright law

It should.

> Copyright doesn't prevent anyone from "using" a person's work.

It should. The 'free and open internet' is finished because nobody is going to want to subject their IP to rampant laundering that makes someone else rich.

Tragedy of the commons.

I recommend looking into the many things that NEA (and other national unions like it) do to enact their agendas regardless of their ability to bargain within a given state. For example the U.S. Department of Ed basically exists because of the NEA's lobbying efforts.

State affiliates acting at the behest of a national union is a functional union, and have been effective in collectively bargaining for members since the 1970s.

The NEA is the largest union in the United States.

Because public education has become a vector for propaganda.

Because we spend more per student but with awful results.

Because our brightest don't become schoolteachers.

Because education is years if not decades behind the skills curve.

Because big, powerful teachers unions make change impossible.

Because parents have spared the rod and spoiled the child.