Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 9076810" data-attributes="member: 467">There will absolutely be more Daves. But the world is already full of Daves. Remember &quot;news aggregators&quot; in the early days of the web? Terrible, mindless, worthless sites that still managed to generate tons of traffic and enrich their shady-ass developers. Those weren't made illegal. Why? because that just isn't how any of this has ever worked under capitalism.I want to reiterate that I am NOT okay with the way generative AI is currently trained. That is theft. But regulation is going to change that and generative AI will still be a thing. And it will get better and better and will rely less and less on human editorial intervention.AI is already EVERYWHERE even though we are focusing on Midjourney and CHatGPT and in many case AI is a boon. Your filters on your phone that make your pictures look better? that's AI. Should you be forced to pay a human to do that, or be forced to learn to do it yourself?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Reynard, post: 9076810, member: 467"] There will absolutely be more Daves. But the world is already full of Daves. Remember "news aggregators" in the early days of the web? Terrible, mindless, worthless sites that still managed to generate tons of traffic and enrich their shady-ass developers. Those weren't made illegal. Why? because that just isn't how any of this has ever worked under capitalism. I want to reiterate that I am NOT okay with the way generative AI is currently trained. That is theft. But regulation is going to change that and generative AI will still be a thing. And it will get better and better and will rely less and less on human editorial intervention. AI is already EVERYWHERE even though we are focusing on Midjourney and CHatGPT and in many case AI is a boon. Your filters on your phone that make your pictures look better? that's AI. Should you be forced to pay a human to do that, or be forced to learn to do it yourself? [/QUOTE]

Verification