I’m sure you’ll be the first one to provide public access to your private photos and texts so everyone can check how to improve their lives with those valuable resources.
Amazing how propaganda by the rich is so successful in making people believe it’s not them who are the parasites.
I draw some quiet satisfaction from feeling that I’ve had a positive influence on the world. I really don’t understand why some are so outraged that they may have benefitted some stranger without payment.
Amazing how propaganda by the rich is so successful in making people believe it’s not them who are the parasites.
Look… You believe society should pay money to property owners. Who owns most of the property? Rich people. You have your ideology but don’t treat me like an idiot.
You put those words in my mouth, I never said I believe that. I’ve been saying that each person owns their data and have the right to decide what it can be used for.
It’s a separate discussion but: that rich people own most of the assets has a lot to do with the fact they steal and use stolen resources to appropriate more resources. It’s parasitic and needs to stop.
I’ve been saying that each person owns their data and have the right to decide what it can be used for.
Fair enough, but that’s a really fine point. You can do what you like with your property; use it, make it a gift, destroy it, give it to charity, … But in daily life of most people, property rights are all about money.
Your ideas demand a massive amount of free money for the likes of Disney. On a societal level, that’s basically it. I feel justified in ignoring a few people who have idiosyncratic plans.
ETA:
It’s a separate discussion but: that rich people own most of the assets has a lot to do with the fact they steal and use stolen resources to appropriate more resources. It’s parasitic and needs to stop.
No. Wealth inequality is an unavoidable part of having property. I can find a simulation for you, if you want.
Inequality is fine as long as it isn’t extreme. You can have limits on inequality by implementing rules. In my opinion it’s about finding a balance where neither the richest nor the poorest person strays too far from the median, otherwise you start having trouble and move slowly towards an oligarchy that’ll end in violence and suffering eventually.
Not sure why you think that but I don’t, I have strong feelings on personal privacy.
I believe you’re constantly trying to steer the conversation into “you and everyone who opposes unethical AI model training only want data owners to get paid”, but it’s not how it is. I want to prevent AI corporations from stealing. It’s a big difference.
Hi there. I’m an artist who gives away everything for free because I don’t personally think it’s ethical to profit from pure human emotional expression. I also don’t think it’s ethical for some faceless corporation to profit from my art. I will ABSOLUTELY fight against my art being used to train AI models, but I have ABSOLUTELY no desire to profit. In fact, I have the opposite desire.
So you’re not seeking rent. Good on ya, because no small artist would be getting any appreciable amount of money. The big bucks go to Disney, Adobe, Getty, and the likes of them.
What am I supposed to do with the information you’re giving me?
I hope you don’t believe people who are opposed to AI companies stealing data are also simultaneously rooting for big corporations such as the ones you mentioned. That would be a very misguided idea unfortunately.
Again, don’t treat me like an idiot. Lemmy is full of threads where people cheer on big corporations like Disney when they go to court. I get that you only care about your ideology and not whether Disney, Adobe, or any other of them profits. But that’s how it goes. Either you change your ideology or you accept what kind of world you are fighting for.
I’m on Lemmy everyday and haven’t come across any thread where vast numbers of people are cheering for big companies in any capacity. Of course you’ll probably have some who just want to stick it in the arse to AI companies and don’t think two steps further, but I don’t believe that’s anywhere close to a significant number of people.
I’m sure you’ll be the first one to provide public access to your private photos and texts so everyone can check how to improve their lives with those valuable resources.
Amazing how propaganda by the rich is so successful in making people believe it’s not them who are the parasites.
I draw some quiet satisfaction from feeling that I’ve had a positive influence on the world. I really don’t understand why some are so outraged that they may have benefitted some stranger without payment.
Look… You believe society should pay money to property owners. Who owns most of the property? Rich people. You have your ideology but don’t treat me like an idiot.
You put those words in my mouth, I never said I believe that. I’ve been saying that each person owns their data and have the right to decide what it can be used for.
It’s a separate discussion but: that rich people own most of the assets has a lot to do with the fact they steal and use stolen resources to appropriate more resources. It’s parasitic and needs to stop.
Fair enough, but that’s a really fine point. You can do what you like with your property; use it, make it a gift, destroy it, give it to charity, … But in daily life of most people, property rights are all about money.
Your ideas demand a massive amount of free money for the likes of Disney. On a societal level, that’s basically it. I feel justified in ignoring a few people who have idiosyncratic plans.
ETA:
No. Wealth inequality is an unavoidable part of having property. I can find a simulation for you, if you want.
Inequality is fine as long as it isn’t extreme. You can have limits on inequality by implementing rules. In my opinion it’s about finding a balance where neither the richest nor the poorest person strays too far from the median, otherwise you start having trouble and move slowly towards an oligarchy that’ll end in violence and suffering eventually.
Ok. And how would these rules fare against your convictions on property?
Which convictions on property?
You obviously have strong feelings on intellectual property. What actually are your views on that?
Not sure why you think that but I don’t, I have strong feelings on personal privacy.
I believe you’re constantly trying to steer the conversation into “you and everyone who opposes unethical AI model training only want data owners to get paid”, but it’s not how it is. I want to prevent AI corporations from stealing. It’s a big difference.
Hi there. I’m an artist who gives away everything for free because I don’t personally think it’s ethical to profit from pure human emotional expression. I also don’t think it’s ethical for some faceless corporation to profit from my art. I will ABSOLUTELY fight against my art being used to train AI models, but I have ABSOLUTELY no desire to profit. In fact, I have the opposite desire.
So tell me exactly what is rent-seeking?
So you’re not seeking rent. Good on ya, because no small artist would be getting any appreciable amount of money. The big bucks go to Disney, Adobe, Getty, and the likes of them.
What am I supposed to do with the information you’re giving me?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking
I hope you don’t believe people who are opposed to AI companies stealing data are also simultaneously rooting for big corporations such as the ones you mentioned. That would be a very misguided idea unfortunately.
Again, don’t treat me like an idiot. Lemmy is full of threads where people cheer on big corporations like Disney when they go to court. I get that you only care about your ideology and not whether Disney, Adobe, or any other of them profits. But that’s how it goes. Either you change your ideology or you accept what kind of world you are fighting for.
I’m on Lemmy everyday and haven’t come across any thread where vast numbers of people are cheering for big companies in any capacity. Of course you’ll probably have some who just want to stick it in the arse to AI companies and don’t think two steps further, but I don’t believe that’s anywhere close to a significant number of people.