We are being forced into so many uncharted territories without being able to give opinions about how these things affect our lives. There are no safety rules or considerations.
These billionaires are only it for themselves, there are not really interested in doing good for the good of humanity. Most of them outright disdain most of humanity but their own selves.
All of their AI efforts that are coming from self-centered unregulated motivations have a very evilish feel to it.
Elon musk aided by trump is a good example of the evil, in how his polital and personal ambition to self deal and protect himself from legal liability and use the camaflouge of cutting "waste and fraud" at the expense of and without even a thought or recognization of how it could and has hurt millions of starving or sick children across the world and even cause many deaths as well.
It is really entirely disgusting and evil.
Supervillain billionaires are really getting a bad and horrific name and they truly deserve it.
Once again big business screws the public to make money. The problem is not AI, the problem is the lack of regulations to control the makers of AI. This will never happen as long as Republicans are in office. Does anyone remember during Bush II the subprime mortgage scandal with the “too big to fail” and public money bail out? What do you think will happen when the AI bubble bursts? Both the Ellison family and Elon Musk have already tried to set this up as Oracle and Space X have lost hundreds and hundreds of millions. Be aware American.
Why doesn’t Cory Booker get broader and deeper support outside of New Jersey? As a snowbird resident of SWFL, who Summers at my boyhood Jersey Seashore stomping grounds in Cape May County, I have been asking myself this question about the honorable US Senator from NJ for many years now. To me Senator Booker, a Stanford University undergraduate and graduate school alumni, a Queen's College, Oxford, Rhodes Scholarship recipient, and a Yale University Law School graduate, is a brilliantly dedicated, very well-spoken, modest civil servant with a wonderful sense of humor.
In my vision of America 🇺🇸, he’d be a strong candidate for the Office of the POTUS.
Very interesting post. It is certainly true that anyone who learns a language, and the literature created in that language, and him- or herself writes in that language, is not guilty of anything by virtue of using an established language. But what is produced has to be largely novel. When that doesn't happen (taking Led Zeppelin as an example, and someone lost a case for having seemed to have been overly influenced by a Marvin Gaye song), there are charges of plagiarism.
AI is, as the A says, artificial. It cannot be original. Its ability to be different from the written works it "learns" is limited. In effect, it always plagiarizes. It has no other options.
A couple of years ago, or maybe last year, a friend of mine who owns a coffee importing, roasting, grinding, and selling business sent me a video that was about 20 minutes long. It had a male and female voice, and a rotating series of images. I got back to him, and I told him I didn't understand what this was. It seemed either like an advertisement or a podcast, and it wasn't a very good example of either. He told me it had been created by AI, in five minutes, by scanning his paperwork and packing. So it was pure plagiarism, but my friend wasn't complaining. He got AI to do in five minutes what it would have taken him much longer to do, and it was in his interest.
But generally speaking, AI is always plagiarism. One problematic exception is some stories of adolescents who are miserable, as adolescents often are, and who consult some form of AI to express themselves. There have been cases of AI (ChatGPT, or whatever) suggesting they should kill themselves, because they're so unhappy. And some of them have. Clearly, no treater would ever tell an unhappy adolescent to commit suicide, so that kind of suggestion would not be considered stolen or plagiarized. The suggestion is not original, in the sense that it represents a logical, if twisted, conclusion to the information given, but it is original in the sense that no one would possibly come to that conclusion
AI. Is a disruptive technology. IMO it was implemented without any foresight.
Actions have real world consequences.
We are being forced into so many uncharted territories without being able to give opinions about how these things affect our lives. There are no safety rules or considerations.
These billionaires are only it for themselves, there are not really interested in doing good for the good of humanity. Most of them outright disdain most of humanity but their own selves.
All of their AI efforts that are coming from self-centered unregulated motivations have a very evilish feel to it.
Elon musk aided by trump is a good example of the evil, in how his polital and personal ambition to self deal and protect himself from legal liability and use the camaflouge of cutting "waste and fraud" at the expense of and without even a thought or recognization of how it could and has hurt millions of starving or sick children across the world and even cause many deaths as well.
It is really entirely disgusting and evil.
Supervillain billionaires are really getting a bad and horrific name and they truly deserve it.
It reminds me of Simon Bar Sinister, the evil mad scientist of Underdog cartoon fame.
C
It reminds me of Simon Bar Sinister, the evil mad scientist of Underdog cartoon fame.
Once again big business screws the public to make money. The problem is not AI, the problem is the lack of regulations to control the makers of AI. This will never happen as long as Republicans are in office. Does anyone remember during Bush II the subprime mortgage scandal with the “too big to fail” and public money bail out? What do you think will happen when the AI bubble bursts? Both the Ellison family and Elon Musk have already tried to set this up as Oracle and Space X have lost hundreds and hundreds of millions. Be aware American.
Can we say “mass plagiarism” boys and girls?
Why doesn’t Cory Booker get broader and deeper support outside of New Jersey? As a snowbird resident of SWFL, who Summers at my boyhood Jersey Seashore stomping grounds in Cape May County, I have been asking myself this question about the honorable US Senator from NJ for many years now. To me Senator Booker, a Stanford University undergraduate and graduate school alumni, a Queen's College, Oxford, Rhodes Scholarship recipient, and a Yale University Law School graduate, is a brilliantly dedicated, very well-spoken, modest civil servant with a wonderful sense of humor.
In my vision of America 🇺🇸, he’d be a strong candidate for the Office of the POTUS.
Very interesting post. It is certainly true that anyone who learns a language, and the literature created in that language, and him- or herself writes in that language, is not guilty of anything by virtue of using an established language. But what is produced has to be largely novel. When that doesn't happen (taking Led Zeppelin as an example, and someone lost a case for having seemed to have been overly influenced by a Marvin Gaye song), there are charges of plagiarism.
AI is, as the A says, artificial. It cannot be original. Its ability to be different from the written works it "learns" is limited. In effect, it always plagiarizes. It has no other options.
A couple of years ago, or maybe last year, a friend of mine who owns a coffee importing, roasting, grinding, and selling business sent me a video that was about 20 minutes long. It had a male and female voice, and a rotating series of images. I got back to him, and I told him I didn't understand what this was. It seemed either like an advertisement or a podcast, and it wasn't a very good example of either. He told me it had been created by AI, in five minutes, by scanning his paperwork and packing. So it was pure plagiarism, but my friend wasn't complaining. He got AI to do in five minutes what it would have taken him much longer to do, and it was in his interest.
But generally speaking, AI is always plagiarism. One problematic exception is some stories of adolescents who are miserable, as adolescents often are, and who consult some form of AI to express themselves. There have been cases of AI (ChatGPT, or whatever) suggesting they should kill themselves, because they're so unhappy. And some of them have. Clearly, no treater would ever tell an unhappy adolescent to commit suicide, so that kind of suggestion would not be considered stolen or plagiarized. The suggestion is not original, in the sense that it represents a logical, if twisted, conclusion to the information given, but it is original in the sense that no one would possibly come to that conclusion
I forgot to note your question "Is it copyright infringement if AI generates the “new” work heavily influenced by a copyright-protected work?"