@charlotte @hipsterelectron @Flaky

yeah the concept of intellectual property is bullshit there’s no controversy,

What is contentious I think is that the AI companies are in any way threatening intellectual property as a property relation, or if this is just the case of capitalists being able to ignore laws when it suits them, while they are still imposed on the rest of us.

I think rather we’re seeing quite the opposite, the intensification of the intellectual property regime and the rights of corporations to extend claims of intellectual property indefinitely, like games / movie / tv/ music industry claiming you don’t actually own a physical copy of media, even hardware manufacturers saying you are only leasing hardware etc.

@ug @hipsterelectron @Flaky the ai companies themselves absolutely do not threaten copyright, i think they fit greatly in the current system, there's a reason why openai and anthropic both push to reinforce it and opportunistically cooperate with IP holders (see the openai disney deal). but ai as a technology in general does not, which is why you also see them making absolutely sure that the production and inference of ai systems is regulated and limited to a handful of large domestic corporates

@ug @hipsterelectron @Flaky a technology that allows anybody to produce any amount of any immaterial product makes the product completely meaningless

@charlotte @ug @Flaky also mentioned in hachette vs IA was the clause in the transformative fair use multi-factor balancing test in which the existence of a secondary market for the books scanned by the IA (which certainly exists since the same copyright covers the physical and ebook versions) was basically the single major factor that made the IA's farcical little scheme clearly infringing and not covered by fair use

@charlotte @ug @Flaky the reason i keep mentioning it in the context of LLMs is because the LLMs directly marketing their usage as a replacement of the original work they consume for training is the exact reason they are (1) widely considered to be "evil" (2) emphatically infringing and not covered by fair use. i literally do not care about someone using a transformer model as a slower and worse search engine because they don't want to learn about indexing and compression, except that the models not citing their sources directly replaces the originals

@charlotte @ug @Flaky and just btw intellectual "property" is directly a function of the ability to reassign rights away from the creator. if you can't transfer it then it's not property. getting played by capitalists calling a human right "property" and letting them define your terms is basic bitch behavior. bodily autonomy is a human right even if the matrix wants to use your body for energy

@charlotte @hipsterelectron @Flaky

i agree with the last bit, and perhaps “valueless” in the marxian sense, havn’t no labor value or exchange value, even in a marginal utility sense, art is typically valued in terms of novelty and skill involved, so the product of LLM’s is worthless in every sense of the word ( unreliable etc. )

i’m not sure if a company that produces anti-value is long for this world

@ug @hipsterelectron @Flaky excuse my mangling of terms, im not exactly proofreading myself right now lol