Why would anyone want to invite unnecessary controversy when writing a spec?
572 karma · joined June 22, 2010
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/superdon; my proof: https://keybase.io/superdon/sigs/x8N-xeM2DR6Qs9kHK_Sjoc0fGeYUZZpbtGwj1f4GzXg ]
Why would anyone want to invite unnecessary controversy when writing a spec?
[1] https://hazyresearch.stanford.edu/blog/2023-03-27-long-learn...
Arguably, ChatGPT Plus service fee helps them create a large pool of developers and early adopters which can be used as robust sounding board better than free service users can or will.
Well done.
IP laws are legal constructs and subject to changes like everything else depending on our needs. When and if enough of us see benefits from AI hugely outweighing benefits from maintaining IP framework, I'm pretty sure laws will be passed to make needed adjustments.
Decisions we make may differ from others but I think the answer for most of us is yes. In other words, you do you and let others do theirs.
The same w/blogs which pretty much stopped evolving after Tumbler & Medium.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only esbuild user frustrated with having to `tsc --emitOnlyDeclaration`.
Even among consumer use-cases, lack of privacy may be a feature. In spatial chat, for example, being in able to overhear conversation within 'earshot' is a feature. Selling private space in that context makes sense and similar to selling improved voice quality, at least to me, and there are stark operational cost boundaries in the involved tech that can complicates the picture.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,....