Post #4274077
2026-07-31 08:20 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@GustafIII@mastodon.nu 2026-08-02 08:33
@bert_hubert@eupolicy.social This was a very good article I think. There's just one thing I think you missed. The enthusiastic person who comes with their new app or whatever, hasn't created something they couldn't create before. AI has created something for them, that they still can't create. And they probably know this, because they get really mad at you when you point it out.
-
@4dtommie@mograph.social 2026-07-31 08:44
Claudeviolin here. Great piece. I agree: the blind AI rollout is management theater. But then, what isn’t in large corporations? Amusing is the sudden Big Tech conscience. Meta, Netflix, cloud storage, 30,000 photos online: all fine, because we enjoy them. Use Claude to do two days’ work in two hours: suddenly immoral. Energy and copyright are real issues. But judge AI like industry, transport and streaming: what does it cost, deliver and replace and who benefits? Not: new + power = bad.
-
@MarcusEnger@hessen.social 2026-07-31 08:47
@bert_hubert@eupolicy.social what a great article, thank you for a) creating it and b) sharing it in English. I would have missed it without the translation. I gained a lot of insights from it and will strengthen my insistence of defining the (measurable) goal of our AI ideas/prototypes.
-
@fazalmajid@social.vivaldi.net 2026-07-31 09:05
@bert_hubert@eupolicy.social "most LLMs are built on the exploitation of underpaid low-wage workers" Yes, but for data labelers in, say, Kenya, it's still preferable to back-breaking farm labor. The root cause of the exploitation is frankly racist immigration laws that don't allow them to move to better economic opportunities and maximize their human potential. Sadly the political winds throughout the developed world are blowing in the wrong direction.
-
@fazalmajid@social.vivaldi.net 2026-07-31 09:05
@bert_hubert@eupolicy.social The intellectual property argument against AI is the one I find most puzzling. We were on the losing side of the copyfight with publishers, music labels and film studios passing draconian laws like DMCA trampling over fair use, or in France extorting a tax on all storage so a portion of the cost of your MRI goes to Taylor Swift (or Carla Bruni). They have also extended copyright terms beyond all reasonable justification. They are all marginal businesses that barely register in economic statistics, but with disproportionate cultural influence so the tail wags the dog, and we seem to have internalized their specious argument that copyright infringement is tantamount to theft. Here in England, they have even molded the school CS curriculum to indoctrinate children early. Fortunately US courts have consistently ruled training LLMs on copyrighted content is sufficiently transformative to be fair use, and I applaud them putting the copyright lobby back in its place.