@cwebber a while ago I watched Alexander Avila's video on AI discourse and how huge IP holders were instrumentalizing anti-AI sentiment to strengthen copyright, and how AI companies were delighted to be regulated into a cartel where they're the sole providers of "legal AI". This was more than a year ago, it seemed smart but I didn't really think it would play out exactly like that. Now it feels so prescient...

@cwebber The corporate capture of all things regulatory makes #3 the most likely scenario if the guillotines don't stop being here rhetoric before then.

We're not headed for peaceful places in any near-future timeline.

@cwebber I feel the same way, I loathe AI, but I also loathe companies that lock down devices that you own. So I am enjoying them being fucked by their own devotion to AI.

@cwebber You're gonna love this one then: https://rea.tools/

@cwebber Your fear is exactly my fear.

That the law only serves those who demand servants.

@cwebber it's kinda funny how our industry has been so dependent on the obfuscation side effect of compilers as a means of source protection.

Thinking about how so many attempts at packaging JS failed because they were easily reversible. Feels like the shoe is on the other foot, in a way.

@cwebber in soviet russia, commons exploit you

@cwebber as always "you're allowed to do the previously illegal thing but ONLY if you use the global warming machine" is the outcome I am most afraid of

The likely path to the latter comes exactly out of the "this tech is really scary we need to lock it down!" push that Anthropic et al keep pushing. If they can get a regulatory moat, and if they can get enough licensing deals with all the big players and every service you've agreed to a Terms of Service signing over your rights to the things you make with, the big AI corporations can position themselves as monopolists who are in *exclusive* control over being able to do these things, from both an "IP rights" and a "safety" perspective.