zlacker

>>rntn+(OP)
You've got to love the idea that copyright doesn't apply to input code (from others), but does to their output code.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24117932-apple

>>anothe+K9
Yeah I would love it if these companies simply took a principled stance against IP restrictions, but alas. Like they are literally running directly in to the main problem these restrictions create and then thinking “we need a way to say those don’t apply to us while making sure they still apply to everyone else”.

>>Taylor+0b
Here’s a principled stance: you don’t have the right to a sound, arrangement of pixels, or ideas. IP for nobody. If you disagree, then it should be “IP for everyone” and not “whether or not I support IP depends on who benefits from it”. An answer that differs from piracy to AI training is not a principled answer.

>>alphan+rc
Right. I believe IP restrictions are harmful, don’t actually do what we commonly believe they do, and are a significant net negative to society. I am in favor of either slowly or quickly abolishing IP restrictions. Tho I think it would need to be done slowly to avoid shocks to an economy which has become dependent on these restrictions.

>>Taylor+Le
Who will pay for Stack Overflow servers and maintenance if OpenAI is just going to scrape their content and stop people from going to Stack Overflow?

>>300bps+Rk
If LLMs can't find the answer then people will go ask it on SO. If SO is liable to shut down because the majority of their business got wiped out then somebody with a vested interest (like say, MSFT/OpenAI) will step in and bail them out (or create a clone, or something functionally equivalent).