• KeenFlame@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I work with ip and still think it is folly. Idk why you spam about private information, that’s not what anyone was asking or discussing about

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      You talked about information. Not public, not private, information.

      Your responses heavily imply that you think public and private information should be treated differently, but you keep talking about how information should be free and open. So you are willing and believing that there are rules. So why shouldn’t public information be public information while not being allowed to use for e.g. ai without permission? You can allow copying and modifying of information without allowing e.g. it being used for ai training. You can make that rule, just like you can different rules for private information than for public information.

      I really don’t understand what you don’t understand.

      • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Put it out and it’s public. At that point it is folly to regulate. If personal information is taken and spread, the culprit has committed a crime but in my opinion the rest is folly. I thought it was obvious so I omitted the intensely self explanatory details

        • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Oh so it is a crime! So you totally could make it illegal to use public information to train ai without consent. Making it really difficult to collect billions in funding. Thanks for the admission.