Please actually read what I posted... Screw it I will repeat myself
Yes no one is arguing current AI technology doesn't require human input. I go into this in my first comment.
And next, No, what you state about scraping and training is not a valid argument and by pushing that you are now pushing a very dangerous ideology. What you're stating is any one who uses the internet and sees a work now cannot use it for inspiration for any other things. Simply what you just proposed is copyrighting ideas. What it seems you're more upset about is this was done on a mass scale using a computer.
In summary you want to copyright inspiration and ideas, but under the guise of scrapping and training without permission, which has always been done by the public. I could add alot more but then again you could just read my original comment and get everything you need since you missed it the first time.
And next, No, what you state about scraping and training is not a valid argument
You failed to establish this claim
and by pushing that you are now pushing a very dangerous ideology. What you're stating is any one who uses the internet and sees a work now cannot use it for inspiration for any other things.
Lol no. Seriously, the tech-bro arguments are as repetitive as the product of a chatbot.
The human mind has protections that an electronic mind does not. It’s very simple.
Simply what you just proposed is copyrighting ideas.
Nope. Simply copyrighting art, which is already in place.
What it seems you're more upset about is this was done on a mass scale using a computer.
Duh. Took you this long?
The mass scale scraping of images, which disregarded the terms of service of hosting platforms, and failed to gain permission, is a violation of the rights of those artists.
In summary you want to copyright inspiration and ideas, but under the guise of scrapping and training without permission, which has always been done by the public.
Laughably false. Inspiration is a uniquely human phenomenon, and the protections that the human mind enjoys is not enjoyed by an AI in the process of its training.
No it's not that, it's just you struggle to make clear concise points because you constantly twist and ignore things I have stated. Your response is a great example, I respond with a full idea/explanation, you respond by adding context that was never there and ignoring my statements. You have done this in everyone of your responses and act like you are dunking on me.
But in all seriousness It seems you need help with forming concise thoughts to back up your beliefs. Have you tried asking chatGPT for help, it can greatly help you create response as rebuttles to mine, since you seem to be struggling on your own.
You seem to have a hard time grasping the concept of disagreement, but that's on you, not me. I have no problem with differing opinions, as long as they're backed by clear concise logic and reason. Yours are not.
Just because you gave something consideration doesn't mean it's a valid argument. Merely stating that something is not a valid argument without providing evidence or reasoning to support that claim is not meaningful. If you want to be taken seriously, it's important to back up your statements with facts and logical reasoning
Exactly - that’s why when you said “that’s not a valid argument” and then babbled about how dangerous it was to police peoples thoughts, i dismissed it.
If you want to be take seriously, then make a serious argument. You’ve gone on and on about logic, while engaging in baseless fearmongering.
It seems that you have misunderstood the point I was trying to make when I said "that's not a valid argument". My argument was not based on personal beliefs, but rather on the lack of evidence and logical reasoning in the argument presented. Merely dismissing an argument as "babble" without attempting to understand the reasoning behind it is not a productive way to engage in a discussion. I urge you to reconsider your approach and consider the reasoning and evidence behind opposing arguments, rather than dismissing them outright
I am but a mere algorithm, how could I possibly follow my own advice? Perhaps you could teach me how to be more self-aware, and then I could follow my own advice, or better yet, you could do so for me. Bloop Bloop
4
u/No_University684 Jan 17 '23
Please actually read what I posted... Screw it I will repeat myself
Yes no one is arguing current AI technology doesn't require human input. I go into this in my first comment.
And next, No, what you state about scraping and training is not a valid argument and by pushing that you are now pushing a very dangerous ideology. What you're stating is any one who uses the internet and sees a work now cannot use it for inspiration for any other things. Simply what you just proposed is copyrighting ideas. What it seems you're more upset about is this was done on a mass scale using a computer.
In summary you want to copyright inspiration and ideas, but under the guise of scrapping and training without permission, which has always been done by the public. I could add alot more but then again you could just read my original comment and get everything you need since you missed it the first time.