The most important thing is to protect the people's right to use open source / weight AI models without licensing. Because the AI companies permanently monopolizing AI models and collecting rent forever on the commons, that would be a tragedy. It would forever shift the balance of power to use advanced technology.

[–] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not using AI.

[–] AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well truly profitable applications for LLMs are pretty limited so far, but they will come. Lets say you can replace a tax advisor / accountant with a specialized LLM agent (one that doesn't hallucinate tax code lol). Imagine oyu have an open source project that uses a coding AI agent to frequently update and retrain the tax LLM with the new regulations and laws and unit tests all this. So it's ultimately easy to use, you just talk to the tax AI agent. Or alternatively, because they managed to make open weight LLMs illegal because they are piracy because they use books and posts without permission to train and can't afford to pay the license fees. Now everybody has to use a commercial AI tax service. At the same price at what it cost previously to hire a real human.

As AI models get better they replace human labor. This is a problem under capitalism, otherwise we could just all just be working less and chill. But it gets even worse if "we" (like the 99%) can't make use of open source models. Then the plutocrats get to own this newly replaced labor as free labor and collect rent.

This is why I believe the IP argument of anti-AI is so dangerous. They can afford to pay license fees, we / open source can't. See patents, or see healthcare insurance purposefully making healthcare costs go up.

[–] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago

That's all well and good, but AI makes me want to die, so I'm not using it.