Raw LLM Responses

I have a lot of ethical issues with AI, and I agree that to a degree big corporations using AI are getting leeway by virtue of being big corporations ...but I think you, and /u/We_are_being_cheated , and other people who say this sort of thing are really not understanding how this stuff works: What AI is doing has pretty clear differences from, say, Piracy or typical instances of Infringement where you're using somebody else's work in your own work. The argument that AI companies are using is that the act of AI training, and most of the AI generated outputs, are Fair Use: That they take only small portions of the original works they're trained with, and transform it into something new or different. And bluntly, they might have a pretty strong case: the AI algorithm you make with training is obviously not even in the same medium or format as the works it's trained on, and even with the images it spits out, most of the time they won't particularly resemble any one work that was used to train the AI: A human artist using references is more likely to have visible similarity, unless you instruct an AI to be hyperspecific with the characters or images it's trying to generate. I go into way more detail on Fair Use and how AI stacks up with it [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1icytwe/openai_furious_deepseek_might_have_stolen_all_the/m9vzgrj/), alongside more info on some of the stuff I mention below, but to sum it up: In general I really think people need to stop trying to fight and argue against AI on copyright grounds and find another avenue of regulating it, or at least do so more carefully: It sucks, but the reality is that what AI is doing, legally, is not inherently dissimilar from the sorts of stuff people like and support human artists, archivists, etc doing, and trying to frame it as theft or plagiarism or infringement just validates what media megacorporations and lobbying firms argue when they try to erode fair use and expand copyright to