zlacker

>>mjcl+(OP)
Johansson has money to hire lawyers and immediate access to media, so they backed off.

Altman and OpenAI will walk over everyone here without any difficulty if they decide to take whats ours.

>>nabla9+m8
I often wonder why tech people think so positively about companies they idolise who are Uber-ing their way through regulations. Where do they think it stops?

Why would people not want laws? The answer is so they can do the things that the laws prevent.

This is POSIWID territory [0]. "The purpose of a system is what it does". Not what it repeatedly fails to live up to.

What was the primary investment purpose of Uber? Not any of the things it will forever fail to turn a profit at. It was to destroy regulations preventing companies like Uber doing what they do. That is what it succeeded at.

The purpose of OpenAI is to minimise and denigrate the idea of individual human contributions.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

>>ecjhdn+1g
> I often wonder why tech people think so positively about companies they idolise who are Uber-ing their way through regulations. Where do they think it stops?

Because they don't think about the consequences, and don't want to. Better to retreat into the emotional safety of techno-fantasy and feeling like you're on the cutting edge of something big and new (and might make some good money in the process). Same reason people got into NFTs.

>>nerdpo+yn
> Same reason people got into NFTs.

Same people who got into NFTs.