That only works if you assume that the exclusive value is in the object and not the labour.

The reproduction of the object is essentially free in the internet, but the labour to produce it isn't.

If I spent 3 years making my codebase, and you copy paste the git repo, yeah your access to the information is not going to replace the original. But your labour cost is 0 and you can undercut the 3 years of expense, loans or debt I adquired to produce it.

Btw the FBI murdered Aaron Swartz for attempting to open access to research papers, Mark Zuckemberg admitted to stealing those ssame papers through libgen and showed off the results of Llama and his stock price went up.

I think the piracy argument falls apart when the class warfare and 2 tier justce system is openly weaponised towards open access

▲

satvikpendem an hour ago | parent [-]

Labor doesn't have value inherently, it's about what is produced by said labor. These days even the labor to create something falls to zero via LLMs so I'm not sure the point is valid these days.

	▲	Arkhaine_kupo 21 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Labor doesn't have value inherently Almost nothing does. Value is largely subjective. You deciding it is irrelevant to you is as inherently worthless as the marxist ideal that labour is the maximal value of society. The non subjective opinion is that there is a necesary amount of work/energy requiered to create things and that the created things can be consumed/used by others. LLMs do not reduce labor to 0, the energy to power the GPU, the labor to create the gpus, the labor to train the models is all there, as well as all the labor to produce the original material the LLM is trained on. Even if the subjective experience of someone consuming the created thing is the same.