upvote

points

by drdaeman13 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby nonethewiser13 hours ago|
[-]
One problem. He said stealing in general is a made up term.

Do you think stealing is real?

reply
upvoteby drdaeman8 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Read it in the context. The “made up” wasn’t a general statement. No one argues stealing doesn’t exist at all. My friend’s bike was stolen. What’s made up is application of this word to situations that are incompatible with what stealing is supposed to mean.

Compare this to “the smell of soup and the sound of money” type “theft”.

reply
upvoteby dnautics6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
"copying is not theft/ stealing a thing leaves one less left/ copying it makes one thing more/ that's what copying's for"
reply
upvoteby drdaeman5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Yes. Although, to be pedantic - stealing relocates (it doesn’t leave one less, it moves the only thing into another person’s possession), while copying duplicates.

Copy vs move is IMHO accurate semantics.

reply
upvoteby dnautics1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
i dont know what you're talking about: it's certainly one less for the victim! and if no theft occurred, nobody would be left with one less.
reply
upvoteby matheusmoreira13 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
"Stealing" of non-rivalrous goods?

I don't "think" it's not real. I know.

reply
upvoteby nonethewiser13 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Reread what he called a morally charged, made up term by future monopolists. Stealing. Not distilling, not stealing “non rivalrous goods.” Just stealing.

Do you agree with what he actually said?

reply
upvoteby matheusmoreira12 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Yes, "tokens, trained on the sum of human knowledge", are the most absolutely, unambiguously clear example of a non-rivalrous good I've ever seen.

The current copyright status quo has them placed in the public domain. There is literally nothing wrong with "stealing" those tokens. They have exactly zero legal protection. "Stealing" those AI output tokens is so fundamentally impossible that it wouldn't be "stealing" in this case even if you subscribe to the copyright monopolist propaganda that copyright infringement is "stealing", and I most certainly do not.

Hilariously, that means we don't even fall prey to things like DMCA anticircumvention laws. If they encrypt the reasoning traces and we break the encryption somehow, we've done nothing wrong since the data wasn't copyrighted in the first place!

reply
upvoteby blackqueeriroh7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
There are bunch of legal protections. They may not fall under copyright, but depending, you could be looking at breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation, CFAA, and also, if you buy them off someone else, now we’re into tortious interference.
reply
upvoteby dnautics6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
when you steal my bike you deprive me of my ability to use it. if i copy your notes, you still have access to them and may make use of them. unless somehow copying destroys the original, it is not stealing.
reply
upvoteby UpsideDownRide5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Sticking to what was literally said and not meant by a person in a casual comment/conversation is certainly a strategy that can be used.
reply
upvoteby michaelmrose6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
If you already know the answer and everyone already knows the answer you asking this question is wasting everyone's time.
reply