Life's not fair.
It isn't unfair either, it's just a sequence of events from your birth to your death. Some fair, some unfair, some between the extremes, and some having nothing to do with fiarness at all.
What''s your point?
Not watching ads is akin to not paying for a meal when you go to a restaurant.
IMO there is a lot wrong with this analogy, from the actual time needed to pprepare the food being spent already to the payment being mandatory vs ads not being watched (9whether blocked, or letting them run but not actually watching them by turning away) the content is still delivered.
The entitled viewers who feel that they can consume a product for free
Where do the people who don't mind ads but are respponding fit into your charactarization? How does YT adding more ads, more unskippable ads, being arguably something that lead to a rise in adblock usage fit into your charactarization?
Just provide us a service where we can upload a file and have an automatic rapid assessment on whether it's copyrighted or not. Thanks!
Wouldn't it be easy in terms of technically being copyrighted if talking about a work that is made in any country where copyright is automatic? Maybe I am being a dumbass in asking this... but my greater point is the flaw of just hyperfocusing on copyright status as being the line to draw in the sand - in that, if for instance, people are conditioned to think "copyrighted automatically == off limits" - and that thinking gets into legislative efforts, that'd kill off a lot of efforts to make training data with explicitly opt-in, and creative commons works potentially, since those are still technically copyrighted works.
Repeat after me: AI is not human.
Be fair; drawing an analogy can be flawed, but the analogy doesn't require thinking it's human - since you're comparing functionality of one system or component to something else that tries to replicate it.
If you had a prosthetic leg that actually functioned perfectly like a real one, comparing its functionality wouldn't automatically be saying "it's a real leg." People who make this argument, IMO, miss that scope where the attempted comparison is being made - even if that doesn't change the flaws that exists with said comparisons.
have federal law enforcement at least harass the hell out of the top users and downloaders of LAION-5B because it was discovered to have thousands of CSAM images in it.
Do you mean "in the training data" I thought the dataset used for image training doesn't (or isn't) supposed to have actual image data in it IIRC at least.
X years past the death of the copyright owner
VERY strong disagree; copyright should never have been expanded to it being "author's life plus
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
Basically, it expired WITHIN the lifetime so the public domain had a regular influx of new material, and so that creators who would benefit from their copyright, would still have to create, which'd perpetuate the cycle of creation, and eventual public domain enriching.
"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne