Well in this case there' s no question - OpenAI benefit the "little guy" more.
It’s not unreasonable to demand AI companies to play by the same rules as everyone else.
But when you hate those very rules, shouldn't you be cheering on the people that are seemingly ignoring them and are likely to try and challenge them in court/lobby to be changed/removed? Right? "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" and all that?
Oh, but not when those people are evil capitalist companies that make AI product lol.
Irrelevant. Why would anyone need to turn it on or off 3 times in a year?
So your argument now is just that it should be disabled by default?
You know you can make throwaway meta accounts, don’t you? You don’t have to give it your real details and add all your friends.
No, just that that’s got nothing to do with the topic or conversation at hand.
Why? Going to trial for not having a license when you don’t have a license makes no sense. It would be a waste of time and money for everyone involved as the outcome is known from the get go.
But it is self driving, and it needs to be supervised like the name says.
OP - this was how things were done back in the day. This hasn’t been done this way for a long time now.
A "fair distribution of wealth" isn't really a thing though. What you likely consider "fair" is most likely "not fair" to high income earners, correct?