Attached: 1 image
Here's the latest AI slop creator ripping off my content.
This time they ran my script through an AI "podcast" generator (likely the free one by Adobe) and put it under the footage from my latest video.
When I make my videos, I spend hours travelling and filming on-location to get real footage that can't be found anywhere else.
Then these AI slop creators steal it and release it as their own.
About 90% of my exposure to "AI" these days is just slop farms ripping me off.
I mean that’s great and all, but intellectual property still isn’t real. My statement is not narrowed to AI. Art can’t be stolen, nor can ideas. They can only be shared and mimicked.
All of my creative and hobbyist contributions are open source, none of them use AI shit in any capacity, and they’re all free to use. Some people even do ‘steal’ my stuff or copy my videos. I don’t care, because intellectual property is not real.
It’s as real as any other social convention. Property only exists at all because we agree not to take each other’s shit. That’s not something fundamental about the Universe that makes physical property different than IP.
What you are saying is, “I didn’t agree to this convention, I don’t avail myself to it, and I may choose not to abide by it.” Which you could also say about cars or any other kind of property. I likewise reject the convention that individuals can be property.
But our convictions and preferences do not change the world. Intellectual property IS real, in the same sense that physical property and slaves are real. All happen to exist due to the same threat of violence.
I agree that there are problems with IP. 40 years ago I was huge into “public domain” software, and I have stayed within that culture as it evolved. The fact that it exists at all undermines your thesis. If there is no such thing as intellectual property, why do you use public or copyleft licenses?
I mean that’s great and all, but intellectual property still isn’t real.
That’s just true for any social construct. I remember feeling smart when I realised this about money at like 12 years old lol.
And as far as caring about it, as long as artists/creatives/journalists need to monetise their output to survive, I’d rather see them protected in some way.
True, I was only saying that artists/… being able to fully own and monetise their work is one of the defensible parts of IP as a concept. I’m not claiming it’s the only possible way to go about it.
I mean that’s great and all, but intellectual property still isn’t real. My statement is not narrowed to AI. Art can’t be stolen, nor can ideas. They can only be shared and mimicked.
All of my creative and hobbyist contributions are open source, none of them use AI shit in any capacity, and they’re all free to use. Some people even do ‘steal’ my stuff or copy my videos. I don’t care, because intellectual property is not real.
It’s as real as any other social convention. Property only exists at all because we agree not to take each other’s shit. That’s not something fundamental about the Universe that makes physical property different than IP.
What you are saying is, “I didn’t agree to this convention, I don’t avail myself to it, and I may choose not to abide by it.” Which you could also say about cars or any other kind of property. I likewise reject the convention that individuals can be property.
But our convictions and preferences do not change the world. Intellectual property IS real, in the same sense that physical property and slaves are real. All happen to exist due to the same threat of violence.
I agree that there are problems with IP. 40 years ago I was huge into “public domain” software, and I have stayed within that culture as it evolved. The fact that it exists at all undermines your thesis. If there is no such thing as intellectual property, why do you use public or copyleft licenses?
That’s just true for any social construct. I remember feeling smart when I realised this about money at like 12 years old lol.
And as far as caring about it, as long as artists/creatives/journalists need to monetise their output to survive, I’d rather see them protected in some way.
IP doesn’t automatically follow from that.
True, I was only saying that artists/… being able to fully own and monetise their work is one of the defensible parts of IP as a concept. I’m not claiming it’s the only possible way to go about it.