zlacker

>>vforgi+(OP)
Regulatory capture and monopolies are now as American as apple pie.

>>Rhodes+e2
Where is the regulatory capture? You might just need to apply for a license. Why is that so horrible?

Most travel agents need a license, taxi drivers etc. Not sure why the same shouldn't apply for "AI"?

>>ChatGT+O4
Oi mate you got a loicense for that matrix multiplication?

>>antilo+V8
Can't wait for our future where GPUs are treated like controlled substances. Sure we'll grab one for you from behind the counter... as long as your license checks out.

>>Escape+9d
I think these worse case scenarios are overblown just like LLMs being AGI-imminent.

This post and another on this thread saying people will have to get a license for compilers or to hook compiler output to the internet would result in the very rapid disintegration of Silicon Valley. Surely there would be a head-spinning pivot against regulation if it looks like it will be that draconian. Otherwise a lot more innovation other than AI would be crushed.

>>davegu+Ng1
Remember DeCSS[1] and later how AACS LA successfully litigated the banning of a number[2]? There was a lot of backlash in the form of distributing DeCSS and later the AACS key, but the DMCA and related WIPO treaties were never repealed and are still used to do things like take youtube-dl repos offline.

Even pretty draconian legislation can stand if it doesn't affect the majority of the country and is supported by powerful industry groups. I could definitely see some kind of compiler licensing requirement meeting these criteria.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeCSS#Legal_response

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AACS_encryption_key_controvers...