tigermountain

There are very few, if any, rare, one of a kind books that would go through this process. If one of these books were scanned for an LLM it would be done delicately in a more time consuming manner and the book would be returned.

When someone can't answer a question a common response to change the subject. Do you have an answer to my question?

So, my question is, of all these books being scanned and then destroyed, aren't there many more copies of these books? And BTW, knowledge isn't permanent. It can be lost.

I do not want Flock cameras surveiling me or my car where it will inevitably become data that's combined with a million other data points on me that might be able to determine what I'm doing, what I'm thinking, and what I might do in the future, just to be able to say we're "safer".

"A social internet cleansed of all content that takes advantage of others would be quite empty." I'm not seeing a problem here.

Companies like this spend a lot of money on lawyers writing up 'terms and conditions' for the sole reason of shielding them from legal liability and the ability to put those protections in place just from the user selecting a checkbox. But my fear is that this case will just be another example used in the argument for age verification, and identification, online.

I'm not monolithic.

As an old person I can also say that old people don't trust AI, or the leaders of those companies, or the current administration...

So the plaintiff had absolutely no ethical concerns about doing this?

People are just going to get sick of the Internet, if they haven't already, and start to look at it like a necessary evil they have to use to do certain things instead of what it once was which was fun and exciting. It's sad.

You're right on both points.