This assumes robots would want to be friend with each other, because robots. They'd probably wipe each other out very efficiently too and they would probably be able to do it without the use of weapons, it would just be cyber warfare.
> these multi-billionaire corporations are taking everyone's honest work, putting it into a computer, and selling the output
And then there's the tens of thousands of people training models and making them freely available to everyone. What I fear most is that regulations introduced "to stop" the multi-billionaire corporations will in fact make sure they're the only ones with the resources to comply with the regulations.
I'm not arguing for nor against regulations, I'm simply commenting on the whole "well, it's technically not stealing, therefore it is OK" debacle, all that means is that legally speaking, it's OK, that doesn't make it ethical.
And if you don't arrest them, not only will they commit crimes, but a new batch of criminals will also commit crimes. This is not a question of enforcement or prevention, this is a question of doing both.
That's another way of saying about the same thing. Which, again, is intuitive and sounds correct. But again, most studies I've seen of this show no or only a very weak link between enforcement and crime rates. Except those issued by the police themselves. Where have you gotten this information?
Jan 2020 club checking in :-) I remember joking about a big pandemic being around the corner at my families New Year's party. Back then it was a few vague rumors from Chinese doctors that I was keeping an eye on but not taking seriously yet.
It's been crazy how much "always been at war with Eastasia/Eurasia" I've seen people around me engage in.
Social media delenda est. Reputation systems, politico-cultural tribalism, and human cognitive vulnerability w/r/t viral information have turned the entire cultural landscape into anarcho-1984.
That's simply not true. Almost all the value will be because it's attributed to da Vinci. You simply won't get the same valuation if it's attributed to a lesser known contemporary.
And you don't need to go historical. I just picked da Vinci as an example. If you or I made a balloon dog sculpture, it won't be valued the same as a Jeff Koons one [0]. Even if it's essentially identical.
There's a whole subset of the art market that is valuing on provenance not the physical object.
[0] I'm assuming you're not Jeff Koons. The problem with HN is that, sometimes, you are actually chatting to a celebrity in the field without knowing.
Well, the balloon dog example simply boils down to the fact that your work will only be seen as a rip-off.
> There's a whole subset of the art market that is valuing on provenance not the physical object.
Subset? I believe provenance is almost everything that matters in art, because it's what equips an artifact with meaning. Duchamp's urinal neatly exemplifies this.
> I believe provenance is almost everything that matters in art, because it's what equips an artifact with meaning.
I've never "understood art", but when you phrased it like that it makes perfect sense. To me, provenance just isn't interesting. So I judge the pieces as they stand in front of me.
Arguably that $39 offers a lot more value by giving you access to valuable statistics than the $20 that gives you the opportunity to waste some time staring at the tele. And I'm not saying there's no value to entertainment, but there's plenty of more fulfilling things to do when it comes to entertainment.
The third in "third-world" has the same meaning as the third in "third-party cookies". They were the countries that aligned themselves with neither the liberal (first) or communist (second) worlds who were the principal parties to the cold war. I wish people would stop getting offended at things they don't understand.
> I wish people would stop getting offended at things they don't understand.
What wasn't understood?
If the term third-world was being used to talk about cold war political alignment, they wouldn't have objected. But that's not how it was being used. The objection was completely valid.