Actually, let me add to my statement of it being intentional.

There are things that AI applications can do that humans can't.

AI is all about analyzing large sets of variables and finding things. Take recent studies in pathology where AI can find the patterns of certain disease in tissue specimens. This only works because the enormous dataset that was provided was already vetted by pathologists. I would argue this isn't counterfeiting human thought. This is enhancing an already utilized algorithm trained by doctors. Remember, a pathologist still needs to put their license on the line if they agree with the AI findings.

There is NO accountability in LLMs. To many people it looks like it is thinking, it has understood what the person has said, and considered boundaries that exist in our minds, but maybe not communicated to the LLM.

Thats why I call these AI programs unsuccessful and counterfeit. They're giving users made by possibly unverified and unreliable data with no accountability.

Information should be free. Don’t feel bad because someone abused something good towards a bad end.

The problem here isn’t archives, it’s “AI” and the people behind it.

Not sure why the knee jerk hate on this one. I like the idea of opening up academic articles and other materials for free and open use.

Who cares what HE says of all people

For the poor? the rich dont pay copyright, only grandma who downloaded nothing else matter's mp3

Sometime I wish lemmy had ahah react

Based brain rot pirate president, abolish intellectual property.

It's the fact that it's not free and open use to us, just to the AI trainers. At least that's what the judges seem to be saying at this point.

I need to stop believing my own lying eyes.

What if president brainrot accidentally kills intellectual property, even glitched out cuckoo clocks are right occasionnally by chance!

Proceeds to start wars with every ethnicity to ensure the murder bots are trained to kill all variants of the population. "Of course they have to kill little people, how else will we know that a little person couldn't judo chop them to death."

mb misread the article

Because it's just for training AI, it will never trickle down to you.

He’s the absolute monarch of a huge country. His opinion matters a lot unfortunately.

My library, you have to check out books on reserve from the circulation desk. They're for in-library use only, 3 or 6 hours at a time, and if you take it into a study room and scan the whole thing with your phone we saw nothing.

We don't like the constant churn of textbooks, either. They eat into our budget. We really appreciate when a professor lends us their personal copies of a textbook for us to keep on reserve. We also try and steer instructions to Open Educational Resources (OER), which are available for free.

Wealth disparity sucks and shouldn't result in different access to education.

And that's why I have an AI training library of movies and TV stored up.

I'll get around to training an AI on it any day now, I'm sure.

I hope your right. It's nice to see questioning of America tech gaint's monopolies finally now Trump is making America not seaming a safe supplier. More Europe than the UK, but even here, it's not as fringe to perceive the problem now.

Not enough yet though. Amazon for example has a load of the market, avoids tax's and has loads of stuff that isn't really legal in the market because it doesn't meet the regs. Example, domestic socket EV chargers (granny leads) should be only up to 10A (as it consistent load and wiring quality varies), but most on Amazon are 13A and a few 16A! Hello house fire. Let alone fake CE marking and EMC emissions.

Well, there are some very successful file sharing systems. That horse did bolt with Napster.

That is not what judges have said. They've said that merely training on text is not a copyright infringement. However, companies that downloaded enormous amounts of pirated texts (i.e., stuff they did not have license to download in the first place) still infringed copyright just like anybody else. Effectively the courts have been holding that if you study material you have license to access, you aren't infringing, but if you pirate that material, even if it is merely to study it, it's still infringing. For better or worse this is basically basically how it's always been.

I have no idea what Trump is proposing. Like most republicans, but especially him, he is incapable of even approaching understanding of nuanced and technical areas of law and/or technology.

You can't be expected to - broadly understand the world and your place in it - when every article, book, or anything else that you've read or studied, you're supposed to pay for.