this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
250 points (92.5% liked)

Technology

60071 readers
3688 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
250
A New York Times copyright lawsuit could kill OpenAI (www.vox.com)
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A New York Times copyright lawsuit could kill OpenAI::A list of authors and entertainers are also suing the tech company for damages that could total in the billions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

deleted

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

If you want to know my personal political stance, I think every company with more than 50 or so employees should be owned by the state. I'm for the dismantling of the stock market and the owner caste. I'm also a realist and understand those things won't come to pass anytime soon. OpenAI will remain and they will happily eat all the fines if it guarantees them a monopoly.

I wasn't playing devil's advocate. My point is these legislation only help companies like OpenAI while bringing no benefit whatsoever to any of us.

There are also ways to hold giant megacorporations to a different set of standards than independent developers.

Yes but that isn't what is being currently proposed, is it?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

deleted

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

deleted

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I never claimed to be a copyright lawyer and there is literally no other copyright discussion except the ones pertaining to AI. I touched on my ideals because you were implying I was pro big business.

I always try to have a reasonable discussion with you but you always end up writing these kinds of comments while never adressing my actual arguments. Have a good day bro.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

deleted

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You edited your comment after I responded. This is what you originally posted:

"That's a pretty good trick, trying to conflate regulation of OpenAI with other impossible ideals you claim to hold, and drawing a hard line between that and your own suggestion: to let OpenAI win.

I feel sorry for your clients.

(By the way, Grimy claims to be a copyright lawyer, but for some reason he only crawls out of the woodwork when OpenAI is discussed. Sam Altman himself seems like a less biased source for how AI should be treated.)"

[–] [email protected] -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

deleted