| ▲ | spiderfarmer 9 hours ago |
| If someone hands out cookies in the supermarket, are you allowed to grab everything and leave? |
|
| ▲ | drfloyd51 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Odd thing about cookies… they disappear after one serving. Websites are an endless stream of cookies. The analogy doesn’t hold. |
| |
| ▲ | ghywertelling 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If copying content from harddrive to another is theft, then so is DNA copying itself. Everything is a Remix culture. We should promote remix culture rather than hamper it. Everything is a Remix (Original Series)
https://youtu.be/nJPERZDfyWc | |
| ▲ | subscribed 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Fine. Me and my 9 friends stand around the cookie-serving person blocking everyone else. It's taking all the cookies over a period of time. The analogy was good. | |
| ▲ | GeoAtreides 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | how about this analogy: I created a most tasty cookie recipe. I give it out for free, and all copies have my name because I am vain person who likes to be known far and wide as the best baking chef ever. Is it ok to get the recipe, remove my name, and write in LLM-Codex as the creator? again, i'm ok with giving the recipe for free, i just want my name out there. | | |
| ▲ | gruez 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | >Is it ok to get the recipe, remove my name, and write in LLM-Codex as the creator? again, i'm ok with giving the recipe for free, i just want my name out there. From a legal perspective, it's a pretty clear "no". The instructions in recipes aren't copyrightable. The moral question is more ambiguous, but it's still pretty weak. Most recipes are uncredited, and it's unclear why someone can force everyone to attribute the recipe to them when all they realistically did was tweak the dish a bit. In the example above, I doubt you invented cookies. | | |
| ▲ | GeoAtreides 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | i'm curious, do you honestly think the argument was about recipes and cookies? maybe it was an analogy? looking back up the comment tree, it does seem to be an analogy, not a discussion about ACTUAL cookies and ACTUAL recipes. | | |
| ▲ | gruez 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | >maybe it was an analogy? In that case it's a terrible analogy because if you can't get people to agree on the cookies case, what hope do you have to extend it to the case you're trying to apply the analogy to? It's like saying "You wouldn't pirate a movie, why would you pirate a blog post", because most people would pirate movies. | | |
| ▲ | GeoAtreides 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | oh man. my comment was about the very human need to be recognized for something created, made, or thought by a person. People are ok with writing blog posts, they're ok with writing software, and they're ok with give it all for free, but they want their name attached and their contribution recognized. | | |
| ▲ | gruez 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | >my comment was about the very human need to be recognized for something created, made, or thought by a person. And I specifically addressed that aspect: >The moral question is more ambiguous, but it's still pretty weak. Most recipes are uncredited, and it's unclear why someone can force everyone to attribute the recipe to them when all they realistically did was tweak the dish a bit. In the example above, I doubt you invented cookies. The cookies analogy was terrible because recipes are rarely credited, but even ignoring the terrible analogy the "recognition" argument still fails. If you wrote a blog post on how to set up kubernetes (or whatever), then it's fair enough that you get recognized for that specific blog post. If my friend asked me how to set up kubernetes, it wouldn't be cool for me to copy paste your blog post and send it over. However similar to copyright, the recognition you deserve quickly drops off once it moves beyond that specific work. If I absorbed the knowledge from your blog post, then wrote another guide on setting up kubernetes, perhaps updated for my use case, it's unreasonable to require that you be credited. It might be nice, and often times people do, but it's also unreasonable if you wrote an angry letter demanding that you be credited. You weren't the inventor of kubernetes, and you probably got your knowledge of kubernetes from elsewhere (eg. the docs the creators made), so why should everyone have to credit you in perpetuity? | | |
| ▲ | GeoAtreides 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | your ability to not address my argument main point is something to behold. can't tell if you're doing on purpose or not. if humans read my blog posts and then things without credit that would be fine. i like human eyeballs and i like them on my content. that's exactly the purpose of the blog post (_in this particular example_), to get human eyeballs on the content. | | |
| ▲ | gruez 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | >your ability to not address my argument main point is something to behold. can't tell if you're doing on purpose or not. Or maybe you're just terrible at writing. >if humans read my blog posts and then things without credit that would be fine. I'm not sure how I (or anyone) was supposed to come away with this conclusion when you were writing stuff like: "i'm ok with giving the recipe for free, i just want my name out there" "the very human need to be recognized for something created" "they want their name attached and their contribution recognized". | | |
| ▲ | GeoAtreides 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | there is nothing contradictory in what i said, and if you weren't favoring a very literal interpretation of my argument you would agree. but, in the spirit of critical reading education, what i meant is: human attention good, machine ingestion bad. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | z3c0 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Digital information may be our first post-scarce resource. It's interesting, and sad, to see so many attempt to fit it within scarcity-based economic models. | | |
| ▲ | Terretta 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | > digital information may be our first post-scarce resource … browses memory and storage prices on NewEgg … Hmm. But the word digital is distracting us. The word information is the important one. The question isn't where information goes. It's where information comes from. Is new information post scarcity? Can it ever be? |
| |
| ▲ | lou1306 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Bandwidth and compute constraints make websites all but an endless stream though. | | |
| ▲ | spiderfarmer 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's exactly it. It costs me real time and money to serve the 97% of fake traffic that just takes without giving me anything in return. |
| |
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | throwaway613746 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|
| ▲ | bengale 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s interesting to see twists on the old anti-piracy arguments recycled for anti-ai. |
| |
| ▲ | gruez 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Turns out many (most?) people on the internet were never anti-copyright in the first place. They were just anti-copyright (or at least, refused to challenge the anti-copyright people) because they wanted free movies and/or hated corporations. | | |
| ▲ | subscribed 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Many of these people live int he countries where downloading for own use is lawful, since they're paying copyright levy exactly to cover for that. They don't have to hate the copyright. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | falcor84 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That really depends, but the quick answer is that according to our human social contract, we'd just ask "how many can I take?". Until now, the only real tool to limit scrapers has been throttling, but I don't see any reason for there not to be a similar conversational social contract between machines. |
| |
| ▲ | volemo 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Isn’t robots.txt such a “social contract between machines”? But AI scrapers couldn’t care less. |
|
|
| ▲ | GaggiX 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I will copy the supermarket and paste it somewhere else. I'm also going to download a car. |
|
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | Bender 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If someone hands out cookies in the supermarket, are you allowed to grab everything and leave? Depends on the trust level of your society. where the store resides. The internet is a cesspool of vagrants, thieves, mentally unstable, people and software with no impulse control, pirates and that is just talking about corporations. It gets so much worse with individuals. |
|
| ▲ | pbasista 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| This is a dishonest analogy. In your example, there is only a limited amount of cookies available. While there is no practical limit on the amount of time a certain digital media can be viewed. You are allowed to take one cookie. But you are allowed to view a public website multiple times if you so want. |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway613746 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | spiderfarmer 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | joquarky 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > If I can poison them and their families, I will. Don't post anything online that you don't want to be brought up in court later. | | |
| ▲ | spiderfarmer 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Like the OP's solution it was about scrapers and the models they share their data with. |
| |
| ▲ | ImPostingOnHN 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Wow, how did you manually hand-write 6 million web pages? That is impressive. It would take me a while to even montonically count that high. | | |
| ▲ | subscribed 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | You're trying to use a quite unfunny "sarcasm" to move the goalpost to the strawman (they never claimed they handcrafted these pages) and quickly gloss ove the fact it's 20 years of work so why not? | | |
| ▲ | ImPostingOnHN 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | You're ascribing an adversarial attitude to me which is actually held by nobody except yourself. The question was genuine and out of curiosity, and they can answer for themselves, however they choose. From the posting guidelines: > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes. > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. I am a friend, not a foe, and so are your other fellow HN posters. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | hollow-moe 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There sure is a limit in the load that the server you're DDoSing can take or the will for people to post new worthy content in public. The supply is limited just not at the first degree. Let's make a small edit: Are you allowed to take all the cookies and then sell them with a small ribbon with your name on it ? | | |
| ▲ | spiderfarmer 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Their is no arguing with pirates. They’ll take what’s yours and forget about you while you tend to the ashes. |
|
|
