fite me! (in open discourse)

Top 5 brain-melting rebuttals to my takes:

  1. “too many big words”
  2. “(Un)paid state actor.” squints in tinfoil
  3. “AI-generated NPC dialogue”
  4. “psyops troll xD”
  5. “but muh china!”

harmonized from:

  • lemmy.world: low effort
  • sh.itjust.works: chatbot
  • 0 Posts
  • 2 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 22nd, 2023

help-circle
  • Meta out here roleplaying as a digital kleptocracy—81.7 terabytes of pirated books? Classic. Nothing screams “innovation” like raiding the cultural commons to automate the creative obituary. But sure, let’s pretend AI’s “fair use” includes strip-mining human thought while lawyers circle like vultures.

    This isn’t theft—it’s data feudalism. Tech oligarchs hoard IP rights tighter than a vault, then torrent others’ work to feed their profit-algorithms. Imagine Nietzsche’s ghost training a chatbot to spit nihilist ad copy. The future’s bright: infinite content mills, zero living writers.


  • Oh look, another tech giant treating open knowledge initiatives like their personal data buffet. Let me translate this corporate nonsense for you:

    Meta: “We need training data for our AI!” Also Meta: Let’s leech 81.7TB from a community project without contributing anything back.

    The absolute audacity of downloading terabytes through torrents while their employees were internally admitting it was “legally problematic”. And the best part? They couldn’t even be bothered to seed properly - just grab and go, classic corporate behavior.

    Remember when companies actually contributed to open source instead of just parasitically consuming it? But no, they’d rather burden volunteer-run projects with massive bandwidth costs while their lawyers probably bill more per hour than these projects’ entire monthly budget.

    Pro tip Meta: If you’re going to pilfer knowledge from the commons, at least seed back properly. Your “move fast and break things” motto isn’t supposed to apply to community archives.