Sam Altman needs enclosure of the digital commons to make AI slop into money but the Internet Archive can't lend books for free, what an embarrassing timeline
@ingrid #TheDarkestTimeline it has to be.
@ingrid This is why we have got to unite to defend the commons from those who would exploit them, and why the notion that excluding those who would harm the commons somehow violates the very notion of a commons is absolute nonsense in the same way "you must tolerate the intolerant" is.
@ingrid what. Is. Happening?
@ingrid maybe people will start to understand how laws are written for corporation, and ohh boi, isn't copyright law exactly like that.
@ingrid … more than free, the archive did it in a privacy clean way.
@ingrid I could totally use more context for this. I only just discovered what AI Slop is and I know I hate it.
@ingrid
Controversial opinion: they're both wrong
Ah come on now Gerard, you can't go explaining to people that libraries actually pay writers a little bit of money when people borrow their books and the IA were just giving away the stuff.
Then instead of passing around a writer's books they'd have to campaign for UBI so writers wouldn't need to be paid through sales or something which would involve actual work rather than self-justification.
Much easier to "destroy (C)" to the benefit of Disney and OpenAI. Less effort.
@thekilt @Homebrewandhacking @ingrid
Depends on the library system. Not everywhere is USA
Had you considered reading the link that you posted? It does not mention library royalties.
Here is a link, parochially, I admit, from the UK government.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/library-book-loan-payment-scheme-updated-to-benefit-authors
Hope this helps.
@thekilt @Homebrewandhacking @ingrid
Not every jurisdiction works like USA
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Lending_Right
@ingrid That's exactly it - Altman's trying to make money, the Archive isn't.