zlacker

>>davidg+(OP)
I’ve noticed that people tend to disapprove of AI trained on their profession’s data, but are usually indifferent or positive about other applications of AI.

For example, I know artists who are vehemently against DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc. and regard it as stealing, but they view Copilot and GPT-3 as merely useful tools. I also know software devs who are extremely excited about AI art and GPT-3 but are outraged by Copilot.

For myself, I am skeptical of intellectual property in the first place. I say go for it.

>>kweing+v6
I am a programmer who has written extensively on my blog and HN against Copilot.

I am also not a hypocrite; I do not like DALL-E or Stable Diffusion either.

As a sibling comment implies, these AI tools give more power to people who control data, i.e., big companies or wealthy people, while at the same time, they take power away from individuals.

Copilot is bad for society. DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are bad for society.

I don't know what the answer is, but I sure wish I had the resources to sue these powerful entities.

>>ghowar+99
The best proposal I’ve heard to deal with the societal/economic problems this sort of A.I. poses were made by Jaron Lanier: https://youtu.be/rGqiswuJuQI?t=1190 …I can see why his proposals of providing (micro-)compensation to people whose tremendous efforts end up being mined by these algorithms would not be popular with researchers/companies who stand to benefit vastly (…presumably including the investors who own this site?). The lobbying power/political power/ awareness/financial resources of your average (atomised) artist/programmer/musician etc. is pretty much nil in comparison… Forgive the clumsy analogy, but I have a feeling the whole thing might end up something like a haulage company that doesn’t want to pay any taxes to help fix the roads though?