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
What makes them bad?

I am against Copilot because Microsoft is training the models with public data disregarding copyright (also, doesn't include it's own code).

>>epolan+go
Because they centralize control, as I said in [1].

Put another way, AI's are tools that give more power to already powerful entities.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33227303