‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Unsealed Briefs in Authors’ Case v. Microsoft/OpenAI

631 points · 623 comments · papergirl

  1. Skyy93 · · focus · HN ↗
    This is a lobby organisation using only the pieces and bits they like to push their own agenda.

    "sketchy russian website", how about using some more clear description like: A library for sharing books and articles that should be partly public domain because they were paid for by the public. Only some of the material is copyrighted by authors. However, some of their work is so old that it is not reprinted anyway.

    But of course such an explanation would not click.

    I also don't see a problem with statements about making people jobless. Imagine if every robotic or automation company advertised like this: Yeah, you'll buy tons of expensive robots and still rely on expensive labor from real people without any efficiency gains.

    1. fzeroracer · · focus · HN ↗
      And OpenAI isn't a lobby organisation?

      Plus you somehow didn't even read the article properly, given that "sketchy russian website" is part of a direct quote.

      1. Skyy93 · · focus · HN ↗
        I have read the article. I called out that they are putting so much emphasis on this term, which is one line, one opinion and build 1/2 of their argument: AI-Company - bad! on it.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.