Honestly, I'd love to give them their own little pkace to play Ancap King if it meant thry stopped breaking civilization for the rest of us.
HakFoo
joined 2 years ago
It's easier just to price in the fee than having to shut down or retool a project.
The problem with attribution is the difficulty of 1000% accurate compliance.
If you grab 100 lines of code from a repository, or five paragraphs from a story, there's probably a claim there. If you grab a single word, there's probably not. But in the middle, there's a paralysis of uncertainty-- is n lines similar enough to create liability? Can you remember where you saw what reliably? You end up with a bias towards "over-attribution" and it becomes difficult to pare it back. Does everything need a full Git-style commit history? Are we forever stuck keeping a credit on a project because it's difficult to prove you've fully scrubbed their contributions?
Focus on how we pay artists (ideally lush grants) and forget about credit. Maybe establish a culture where it's voluntary and acceptable-- that people feel that they're allowed to cite their raw materials, and reuse doesn't make the work lesser-- but don't try to use the courts to force people to try to remember and track where they saw something when they just want to create, or it creates a hostile environment.
Hey, the broken clock's right!
IP law always had a built-in scale pronlem. Without a registration-required copyright model, and probably some sort of mandatory licensing rate system, the sheer logistics of finding and arranging rights made a lot of business models inpractical. (For example, why aren't modern bookstores just print-on-demand kiosks, or streaming services have All The Content? In large part because it would cost thousands to track down owners and negotiate terms for $1.87 in royalties multiplied by every item in the catalog.)
This was ignorable for a long time, or even a commercial advantage for firms with access to large, pre-negotiated catalogs. The AI boom created a surprise market of non-incumbents who need to get access to a lot of IP in a streamlined manner.
If we open the door for bulk IP clearance to grant the AI bubble a stro ger legal footing, it can also allow other, potentially more interesting business ideas to slip through.
Operation Bernhard is a literal example. The Nazis tried to flood thr UK with counterfeit notes to undermine their economy.
I could see him loving the idea of expansion to manufacture a legacy. Jefferson may have been a philosopher or a slave-romancer but that's college academic stuff: every middle school student learns he bought Louisiana. McKinley got us as close to an on-paper empire as we got, and they put him on the $500 note for it.
Soft power will never fill the same goal. Being the cultural or moral lighthouse for the West is inherently different from actually raising a flag over their capitals.
It must also be weird for the sycophants who he just nominated to staff it too.
The equivalent of "Daddy got you a pink convertible and you get three minutes to drive it before the repo guy comes"
The Global Foundries split was probably a way to get AMD out of the hyper-capital-intensive fab business. And without a tier-1 customer, Global had less reason to pursue smaller nodes.
Intel has that national-champion thing to keep it afloat. I can imagine there are defence contracts that will never go to a "TSMC Arizona Division" and they'll pay whatever it takes to keep that going.